In:Less Frequently Used Research Methodologies in Applied Linguistics
Edited by A. Mehdi Riazi
[Research Methods in Applied Linguistics 6] 2024
► pp. 111–126
Chapter 7Doing conversation analysis
Investigating Avoidance Strategy
Published online: 5 January 2024
https://doi.org/10.1075/rmal.6.07mar
https://doi.org/10.1075/rmal.6.07mar
Abstract
Avoidance is one of the oldest strategies
identified in cognitive second language acquisition. Since
participants are hiding that they are avoiding using a
particular item of language, behavioral methodologies that
normally do not use introspection might seem ill-equipped to
identify dissimulation. However (based on Markee, 2011), I show here how
avoidance can be respecified and productively re-analyzed by
using a longitudinal CA methodology (see Markee, 2008) to trace how: (1)
ethnographic data that are “talked into relevance” by
participants can be used to demonstrate how avoidance is
verbally achieved in real time over time; and (2) based on
feedback from an anonymous reviewer, how CA methods can also
identify how different participants can simultaneously pursue
conflicting agendas.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.An overview of the present study
- 2.1Communication strategies
- 2.2Learning behavior tracking
- 2.3Participants
- 2.4Data and analysis
- 2.4.1Analysis
- 3.Why was Conversation Analysis (CA) used? And how was it implemented?
- 4.What challenges did the researchers face? How were the challenges addressed?
- 5.Insights gained using the conversation analysis
- 6.Conclusions
Notes References
References (18)
Eskildsen, S., & Markee, N. (2018). L2
talk as social
accomplishment. In R. Alonso Alonso (Ed.), Speaking
in a second
language, (pp. 69–10). John Benjamins.
Garfinkel, H., & Sacks, H. (1986). On
formal structures of practical
actions. In H. Garfinkel (Ed.), Ethnomethodological
studies of
work, (pp. 160–193). Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Goodwin, C. (2003a). Pointing
as situated
practice. In S. Kita (Ed.), Pointing:
Where language, culture and cognition
meet, (pp. 217–241). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
(2003b). The
body in
action. In J. Coupland & R. Gwyn (Eds.), Discourse,
the body, and
identity, (pp. 19–42). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Guerrettaz, A-M., & Johnston, B. (2013). Materials
in the classroom
ecology. The Modern
Language
Journal, 97, 779–796.
Guerrettaz, A-M., Engman, M. M., & Matsumoto, Y. (2021). Introduction:
Classroom discourse at the intersection of language
education and
materiality. Classroom
Discourse, 105(S1), 3–20.
Markee, N. (2008). Toward
a learning behavior tracking methodology for
CA-for-second language
acquisition. Applied
Linguistics, 29, 404–427.
Markee, N., & Kunitz, S. (2013). Doing
planning and task performance in second language
acquisition: An ethnomethodological
respecification. Language
Learning, 63, 629–664.
Mathieu, C. S., Miguel, N. M., & Jakonen, T. (2021). Introduction:
Classroom discourse at the intersection of language
education and
materiality. Classroom
Discourse, 12, 1–14.
Maynard, D. (2003). Bad
news, good news: Conversational order in everyday
talk and clinical
settings. The Chicago University Press.
Sacks, H. (1984). Notes
on
methodology. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds), Structures
of social action: Studies in conversation
analysis (pp. 21–27). Cambridge University Press.
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A
simplest systematics for the organization of
turn-taking for
conversation. Language, 50, 696–735.
Schegloff, E. A., Jefferson, G., & Sacks, H. (1977). The
preference for self-correction in the organization
of repair in
conversation. Language, 53, 361–382.
Shintani, N., & Ellis, R. (2014). Tracking
‘learning behaviours’ in the incidental acquisition
of two dimensional adjectives by Japanese beginner
learners of L2
English. Language
Teaching
Research, 18, 521–542.