Exploring Searching as Evidence of Development in Interactional Competence

Kim, Du Re

doi:10.30961/lr.2020.56.1.73

Lang. Res. 56(1):73-96

pISSN: 0254-4474, eISSN: 2586-7113

DOI: https://doi.org/10.30961/lr.2020.56.1.73

Article

Exploring Searching as Evidence of Development in Interactional Competence

Du Re Kim ¹ ^, ^†

Author Information & Copyright ▼

¹Jamsin High School

^†Corresponding Author: English Teacher Jamsin High School 24 Jamsil-ro, Songpa-gu, Seoul 05502, Korea , E-mail: dorothea0516@gmail.com

ⓒ Copyright 2020 Language Education Institute, Seoul National University. This is an Open-Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Received: Feb 14, 2020 ; Revised: Mar 29, 2020 ; Accepted: Apr 17, 2020

Published Online: Apr 30, 2020

ABSTRACT

In order to identify the critical features of interactional competence (IC) constructs and discuss IC development, this paper describes and analyzes how L2 speakers at different proficiency levels perform searching during talk-in- interactions. Although all L2 participants, regardless of their proficiency, successfully manage problems to keep talk progressing, they display different features in the way they initiate and complete searching. More proficient L2 participants explicitly deploy substantial linguistic and interactional resources such as L1 or a direct request for help, clearly displaying that the searching action is underway. They also engage in searching not only to locate what is unavailable at the moment, but also to search for what is better suited to the context in order to proactively avert possible misinterpretations before they occur. This study suggests that one of the important features of IC is projecting ahead and dealing with potential problems so that speakers can tailor their talk to their recipients, and co-participants can share more interactionally and sequentially common ground as the interaction expands.

Keywords: earching; repair; interactional competence; conversation analysis; second language acquisition

References

Bella, S. (2012). Length of residence and intensity of interaction: modification in Greek L2 requests. Pragmatics, 22(1), 1-39 .

Brouwer, C. E. (2003). Word searches in NS-NNS interaction: opportunities for language learning? The Modern Language Journal, 87(4), 534-545 .

Brouwer, C. E. (2004). Doing pronunciation: A specific type of repair sequence. In R. Gardner, & J. Wagner (eds.) Second language conversations, (pp. 93-113). London: A&C Black .

Canale, M. (1983). From communicative competence to communicative language pedagogy. In J. C. Richard, and R. W. Schmidt (eds.) Language and communication (pp. 2-14). New York: Longman .

Canale, M. and Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1, 1-47 .

Carroll, D. (2006). Co-constructing competence: turn construction and repair in novice-to-novice second language interaction (Doctoral thesis). University of York, United Kingdom .

Cekaite, A. (2007). A child's development of interactional competence in a Swedish L2 classroom. The Modern Language Journal, 91(1), 45-62 .

Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press .

Dӧrnyei, Z. (1995). On the teachability of communication strategies. TESOL Quarterly, 29(1), 55-85 .

10.

Firth, A. & Wagner, J. (1997). On discourse, communication, and (some) fundamental concepts in SLA research. The Modern Language Journal, 81(3), 285-300 .

11.

Firth, A. & Wagner, J. (2007). Second/foreign language learning as a social accomplishment: Elaborations on a reconceptualized SLA. The Modern Language Journal, 91, 800-819 .

12.

Galaczi, E. D. (2014). Interactional competence across proficiency levels: how do learners manage interaction in paired speaking tests? Applied Linguistics, 35(5), 553-574 .

13.

Gardner, R. & Wagner, J. (2004). Second language conversations. London: A&C Black .

14.

Garfinkel, E. (1967). Studies in ethnomethodology. New York: Prentice Hall .

15.

Goodwin, M. H. & Goodwin, C. (1986). Gesture and co-participation in the activity of searching for a word. Semiotica, 62, 51-72 .

16.

Hall, J. K. (2004). Language learning as an interactional achievement. The Modern Language Journal, 88(4), 607-612 .

17.

Hall, J. K., Hellermann, J., & Pekarek-Doehler, S. (2011) L2 interactional competence and development. New York: Multilingual Matters .

18.

He, A. W., & Young, R. (1998). Language proficiency interviews: A discourse approach. Talking and Testing: Discourse Approaches to the Assessment of Oral Proficiency, 14, 1-24 .

19.

Hellermann, J. (2007). The development of practices for action in classroom dyadic interaction: focus on task openings. The Modern Language Journal, 91(1), 83-96 .

20.

Hellermann, J. (2008). Social actions for classroom language learning. London: Multilingual Matters .

21.

Hellermann, J. (2009). Looking for evidence of language learning in practices for repair: A case study of self-initiated self-repair by an adult learner of English. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 53(2), 113-132 .

22.

Hellermann, J. (2011). Members' methods, members' competencies: Evidence of language learning in longitudinal studies of other-initiated repair. in J. Hall, J. Hellermann, & S. Pekarek Doehler (Eds.) L2 interactional competence and development (pp. 147-172). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters .

23.

Hutchby, I., & Wooffitt, R. (2008). Conversation analysis. Polity .

24.

Hymes, D. (1972). Models of the interaction of language and social life. in J. Gumperz & D. Hymes (eds). Directions in sociolinguistics: the ethnography of communication. (pp. 35-51). New York: Wiley Blackwell .

25.

Kasper, G. & Wagner, J. (2011). A conversation-analytic approach to second language acquisition, in D. Atkinson (ed.): Alternative approaches to second language acquisition (pp. 117-142). London: Routledge .

26.

Kasper, G & Wagner, J. (2014). Conversation analysis in applied linguistics. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 34: 171-212 .

27.

Kaur, J. (2009). Pre-empting problems of understanding in English as a Lingua Franca, in A. Mauranen and E. Ranta (Eds.): English as a lingua franca: Studies and findings (pp. 107-123). Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars publishing .

28.

Kaur, J. (2011). Raising explicitness through self-repair in English as a lingua franca. Journal of Pragmatics 43(11), 2704-2715 .

29.

Kim, D. Forthcoming. Emergence of proactive self-initiated self-repair as an indicator of L2 IC development. Applied Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amz047 .

30.

Koshik. I., & Seo, M. (2012). Word (and other) search sequences initiated by language learners. Text & Talk, 32(2), 167-189 .

31.

Lam, D. M. (2018). What counts as "responding"? Contingency on previous speaker contribution as a feature of interactional competence. Language Testing, 35(3), 377-401 .

32.

Lerner, G. H. (1996). On the "semi-permeable" character of grammatical units in conversation: Conditional entry into the turn space of another speaker. In E. Ochs, E. A. Schegloff and S. A. Thompson (Eds) Interaction and grammar, (pp. 52-133). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .

33.

Long, M. & Porter, P. (1985). Group Work, interlanguage talk, and second language acquisition. TESOL Quarterly, 19(2), 207-228 .

34.

Mauranen, A. (2006). Signaling and preventing misunderstanding in English as lingua franca communication. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 177, 123-150 .

35.

Pekarek Doehler, S. (2010). Conceptual changes and methodological challenges: On language and learning from a conversation analytic perspective on SLA. In P. Seedhouse, S. Walsh, & C. Jenks (Eds) Conceptualising learning in applied linguistics (pp. 105-126). New York: Palgrave Macmillan .

36.

Pekarek-Doehler, S. & Pochon-Berger, E. (2011). Developing "methods" for interaction: a cross-sectional study of disagreement sequence in French L2. in J. Hall, J. Hellermann, and S. Pekarek Doehler (Eds.) L2 interactional competence and development (pp. 206-241). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters .

37.

Pekarek-Doehler, S. & Pochon-Berger, E. (2015). The development of L2 interactional competence: evidence from turn-taking organization, sequence organization, repair organization and preference organization. In T. Cadierno & S. Eskildsen (Eds). Usage-based perspectives on second language learning (pp. 233-270). Amsterdam: De Gruyter Mouton .

38.

Pekarek Doehler, S. & Berger, E. (2018). L2 interactional competence as increased ability for context-sensitive conduct: A longitudinal study of story-openings, Applied Linguistics, 39(4), 1-25 .

39.

Pomerantz, A. (1984). Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: some features of preferred/ dispreferred turn shaped. In J. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.) Structures of social action (pp. 57-101). Cambridge: Cambridge university press .

40.

Rieger, C. L. (2003). Repetition as self-repair strategies in English and German conversations. Journal of pragmatics, 35(1), 47-69 .

41.

Roever, C. & Kasper, G. (2018). Speaking in turns and sequences: interactional competence as a target construct in testing speaking. Language Testing, 35(3) 331-355 .

42.

Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking in conversation. Language, 50, 696-735 .

43.

Sacks, H. & Schegloff, E. A. (1979). Two preference in the organization of reference to persons in conversation and their interaction. In G. Psathas (ed.) Everyday language: studies in ethnomethodology (pp. 14-21). New York: Irvington Publishers .

44.

Schegloff, E. A. (1979). The relevance of repair to syntax-for-conversation. in T. Givon (ed.): Syntax and semantics 12: Discourse and syntax (pp. 261-288). New York: Academic .

45.

Schegloff, E. A. (1996). Turn organization: one intersection of grammar and interaction. In E. Ochs, E. A. Schegloff, & Thompson, S.A. (Eds.) Interaction and grammar (pp. 52-133) Cambridge: Cambridge university press .

46.

Schegloff, E. A. (2000). Overlapping talk and the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language in Society. 29(1), 1-63 .

47.

Schegloff, E. A. (2007). Sequence organization in interaction: Volume 1: A primer in conversation analysis (Vol. 1). Cambridge University Press .

48.

Schegloff, E. A. (2013). Ten operations in self-initiated, same-turn repair. In M. Hayashi, G. Raymond, & J. Sidnell (Eds.) Conversational repair and human understanding (pp. 41-70). Cambridge University Press .

49.

Schegloff, E. A., G. Jefferson, and H. Sacks. (1977). The preference for self- correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language, 53(2), 361-382 .

50.

Seedhouse, P. (2011). Conversation analytic research into language teaching and learning. E. Hinkel (ed). The handbook of research in second language teaching and learning, (pp. 345-363). New York: Routledge .

51.

Sert, O., & Balaman, U. (2018). Orientations to negotiated language and task rules in online L2 interaction. ReCall, 30(3), 355-374 .

52.

Skogmyr Marian, K. and Balaman, U. (2018). Second language interactional competence and its development: An overview of conversation analytic research on interactional change over time. Language and Linguistics Compass, 12(8), e12285 .

53.

Waring, H. Z. (2017). Conversation analytic approaches to language and education. In K. King K., Y. Lai, & S. May (eds) Research methods in language and education. Encyclopedia of language and education (pp. 1-10). Springer International Publishing .

54.

Waring, H. Z. (2018). Teaching L2 interactional competence: problems and possibilities. Classroom Discourse, 9(1), 57-67 .

55.

Watanabe, A. (2017). Developing L2 interactional competence: increasing participation through self-section in post-expansion sequence. Classroom Discourse, 8(3), 271-293 .

56.

Wong, J., and Waring, H. Z. (2010). Conversation analysis and second language pedagogy: A guide for ESL/EFL teachers. New York: Routledge .

57.

Young, R. (2011). Interactional competence in language learning, teaching, and testing in E. Hinkel (Ed.): Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 426-443). New York: Routledge .

58.

Young, R. (2019). Interactional Competence and L2 Pragmatics. In N. Taguchi (Ed.) Routledge handbook of second language acquisition and pragmatics (pp.93-110). New York: Routledge .