Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-sxzjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T16:11:46.314Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The organization of turns at formal talk in the classroom

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 December 2008

Alexander Mchoul
Alexander Mchoul
Affiliation:
Australian National University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Beginning with a consideration of some commonsense and professional conceptions of what a formal situation might comprise, this paper goes on to ask the question: where along a linear array which has its poles in exemplars of formal and informal speech-exchange systems, can classroom talk be placed? Its answer is given in part in the form of rules for the taking of turns in classrooms, these being modifications of those, already established in the literature, for natural conversation. These rules allow for and require that formal classroom situations be constructed so as to involve differential participation rights for parties to the talk depending on their membership of the social identity-class ‘student/teacher’. The analyses which follow examine some of the applications and violations of these rules found in audio and video recordings of naturally occurring classroom talk (and transcripts thereof) for their orderliness as orientations to these rules. It is argued that the rules provide a systematic basis for the ‘feelings’ of ‘formality’ that researchers and participants have of such situations and that a decision as to the ‘formality’ or otherwise of a social situation can be predicated on the degree of pre-allocation involved in the organization of turns at talk in the situation. (Configuration and distance in interaction, conversational analysis, turn-taking systems, classroom language, sociology of education; British and Australian English).

Type
Articles
Information
Language in Society , Volume 7 , Issue 2 , August 1978 , pp. 183 - 213
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1978

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Garfinkel, H. (1963). A conception of, and experiments with, ‘trust’ as a condition of stable concerted actions. In Harvey, O. J. (ed.), Motivation and social interaction. New York: Ronald. 183–238.Google Scholar
Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-HallGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, C. (1975). The interactive construction of the sentence within the turn at talk in natural conversation. Paper presented at the 74th Annual Meeting of the American Anthropological Association, San Francisco, 2–6 December.Google Scholar
Hall, E. T. (1964). Silent assumptions in social communication. Research Publications of the Association for Nervous and Mental Disease 42.Google ScholarPubMed
Hall, E. T. (1966). The hidden dimension. Garden City, New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
Hall, E. T. (1968). Proxemics. Current Anthropology 9, 83–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jefferson, G. (1972). Side sequences. In Sudnow, D. (ed.), Studies in social interaction. New York: Free Press. 294–338.Google Scholar
Jefferson, G. (1973a). A case of precision timing in ordinary conversation: overlapped tag-positioned address terms in closing sequences. Semiotica 9 (1). 47–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jefferson, G. (1973b) Preliminary notes on the sequential organization of laughter. Unpublished draft manuscript.Google Scholar
Kendon, A. (1973). The role of visible behaviour in the organization of social interaction. In Cranach, M. and Vine, I. (eds), Social Communication and movement. London: Academic Press. 29–74.Google Scholar
Kendon, A. (in press). The F-formation system: spatial organization in social encounters. To appear in Kendon, A.Studies in the behavior of face to face interaction. New York: Humanities Press. Citations to draft manuscript.Google Scholar
Postman, N. & Weingartner, C. (1973). Teaching as a subversive activity. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
Sacks, H. (1967). Unpublished lecture notes.Google Scholar
Sacks, H. (1968). Unpublished lecture notes.Google Scholar
Sacks, H. (1969). Unpublished lecture notes.Google Scholar
Sacks, H. (1970). Unpublished lecture notes.Google Scholar
Sacks, H. (1971). Unpublished lecture notes.Google Scholar
Sacks, H. (1972). Unpublished lecture notes.Google Scholar
Sacks, H. (1974). An analysis of the course of a joke's telling in conversation. In Bauman, R. & Sherzer, J. (eds), Explorations in the ethnography of speaking. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 337–53.Google Scholar
Sacks, H. (1975). Everyone has to lie. In Sanches, M. & Blount, B. G. (eds), Sociocultural dimenions of language use. New York: Academic Press. 57–79.Google Scholar
Sacks, H. (forthcoming). Aspects of the sequential organization of conversation. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. Citations to draft manuscript.Google Scholar
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A. & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Lg. 50 (4). 696–735.Google Scholar
Schegloff, E. A. (1968). Sequencing in conversational openings. American Anthropologist 70 (6). 1075–1095.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Also in Gumperz, J. J. & Hymes, D. (eds) (1972), Directions in sociolinguistics: the ethnography of communication. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston (1972). 346–80.Google Scholar
Schegloff, E. A. (1972). Notes on a conversational practice: formulating place. In Sudnow, D. (ed.), Studies in social interaction. New York: Free Press. 73–119.Google Scholar
Schegloff, E. A. (1973). Recycled turn beginnings: a precise repair mechanism in conversation's turn-taking organization. Public lecture in the series ‘Language in the context of space, time and society’, Summer Institute of Linguistics, The Linguistic Society of America, University of Michigan.Google Scholar
Schegloff, E. A. & Sacks, H. (1973). Opening up closings. Semiotica 8 (4). 289–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schenkein, J. N. (1972). Towards an analysis of natural conversation and the sense of Heheh. Semiotica 6 (4). 344–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar