KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi / 2018 / Cilt: 33 - Sayı: Özel Sayı

Being a Non-expert in L2 English: Constructing Egalitarianism in Group Preparation Work

Eric HAUSER
Sayfa
93–112
Yayın Tarihi
2022-10-19
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

That is, by doing being non-experts among non-experts, the students construct an epistemically symmetrical, egalitarian relationship within their group

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Analyses are presented of interactional excerpts containing three methods through which Japanese university students preparing for a group presentation in a required English class take an epistemic stance of uncertainty towards their own displayed knowledge of their second language (L2) English.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:These three methods consist of 1) producing a candidate item as uncertain, 2) casting doubt on something just said by self, and 3) overtly claiming lack of knowledge.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:That is, by doing being non-experts among non-experts, the students construct an epistemically symmetrical, egalitarian relationship within their group
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Abstract

Analyses are presented of interactional excerpts containing three methods through which Japanese university students preparing for a group presentation in a required English class take an epistemic stance of uncertainty towards their own displayed knowledge of their second language (L2) English. These three methods consist of 1) producing a candidate item as uncertain, 2) casting doubt on something just said by self, and 3) overtly claiming lack of knowledge. Epistemic stance can be understood as consisting of different dimensions, with a stance of uncertainty related specifically to the dimension of epistemic access. Analyses are also presented of how other students respond or do not respond to such a stance. Through this kind of stance-taking and responses and non-responses, the students do being non-experts in their L2 without making relevant possible asymmetries in expertise. That is, by doing being non-experts among non-experts, the students construct an epistemically symmetrical, egalitarian relationship within their group

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

HAUSER, E. (2022). Being a Non-expert in L2 English: Constructing Egalitarianism in Group Preparation Work. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 33 - Sayı: Özel Sayı, 93–112. https://ajindex.com/articles/531722

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (15)

  1. Beach, W. A., & Metzger, T. R. (1997). Claiming insufficient knowledge. Human Communication Research, 23, 562-588.
  2. Coulter, J. (1991). Cognition: Cognition in an ethnomethodological mode. In G. Button (Ed.), Ethnomethodology and the human sciences (pp. 176-195). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  3. Edwards, D. (2000). Extreme case formulations: Softeners, investment, and doing nonliteral. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 33, 347-373.
  4. Edwards, D., & Potter, J. (2005). Discursive psychology, mental states and descriptions. In H. te Molder & J. Potter (Eds.), Conversation and cognition (pp. 241-259). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  5. Gardner, R. (2001). When listeners talk: Response tokens and listener stance. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Glenn, P. (2003). Laughter in interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  6. Goodwin, C. (1987). Forgetfulness as an interactive resource. Social Psychological Quarterly, 50, 115-131.
  7. Hayashi, M. (2003). Joint utterance construction in Japanese conversation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Helmer, H., Reineke, S., & Deppermann, A. (2016). A range of uses of negative epistemic constructions in German: ICH WEIß NICHT as a resource for dispreferred actions. Journal of Pragmatics, 106, 97-114.
  8. Heritage, J. (2012). Epistemics in action: Action formation and territories of knowledge. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 45, 1-29.
  9. Hosoda, Y. (2006). Repair and relevance of differential language expertise in second language conversations. Applied Linguistics, 27, 25-50.
  10. Jaffe, A. (2009). Introduction: The sociolinguistics of stance. In A. Jaffe (Ed.), Stance: Sociolinguistic perspectives (pp. 3-28). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  11. Jakonen, T., & Morton, T. (2015). Epistemic search sequences in peer interaction in a content-based language classroom. Applied Linguistics, 36, 73-94.
  12. Jefferson, G. (2004). Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. In G. H. Lerner (Ed.), Conversation analysis: Studies from the first generation (pp. 13-31). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Kärkkäinen, E. (2006). Stance taking in conversation: From subjectivity to intersubjectivity. Text & Talk, 26, 699-731.
  13. Kasper, G. (2004). Participant orientations in conversation-for-learning. Modern Language Journal, 88, 551-567.
  14. Kotani, M. (2017). Initiating side-sequenced vocabulary lessons: Asymmetry of linguistic knowledge and opportunities for learning in conversation. Pragmatics and Society, 8, 254-280.
  15. Kunitz, S. (2013). Group plan