A organização da repetição no terceiro turno de sequências IRA: um estudo praxiológico em aulas de PLA

Ruozhou Du; Raquel Abi-Sâmara; Ricardo Moutinho

Authors

Ruozhou Du Jiangxi College of Foreign Studies
Raquel Abi-Sâmara Universidade de Macau
Ricardo Moutinho Universidade de Macau

Keywords:

IRE sequence, repetition, categorization, sequential analysis, ethnomethodology

Abstract

The goal of this work is to identify and describe how the repetition present in the last turn of IRE (Initiation-Response-Evaluation) sequences is organized (i.e., produced and made instructionally visible) in lessons of Portuguese as an Additional Language (PAL). We will show how the IRE sequence is commonly used by participants (students and teacher), who display, recognize and 'trust' in this phenomenon as a fundamental part of the organizational architecture of the institutional classroom environment, especially in the use of repetition with an evaluative function. Using excerpts from videos recorded during PAL classes to beginning-level university students, we will address how previous work on the organization of repetition in the last turn of IRE sequences fails by describing this practice only in sequential terms, without exploring participants' orientation to social categories produced during instructional events.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

AJABSHIR, Z.; POOREBRAHIM, F. Assessing EFL Learners’ Written Performance: The Case of Task Repetition. Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies, Abingdon, v. 39, n. 3, p. 295-305, 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2989/16073614.2021.1942098.

BYGATE, M. Effects of Task Repetition: Appraising the Developing Language of Learners. In: WILLIS, J.; WILLIS, D. (ed.). Challenge and Change in Language Teaching. London: Heinemann, 1996. p. 136-145.

CARLIN, A. P.; MARQUES, J. B. V.; MOUTINHO, R. Seeing by Proxy: Specifying Professional Vision. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, London, v. 30, 100532, 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2021.100532.

CEKAITE, A.; ARONSSON, K. Repetition and Joking in Children’s Second Language Conversations: Playful Recyclings in an Immersion Classroom. Discourse Studies, London, v. 6, n. 3, p. 373-392, 2004. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445604044295.

CHAUDRON, C. Second Language Classrooms. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1988.

EISENMANN, C.; LYNCH, M. Introduction to Harold Garfinkel’s Ethnomethodological “Misreading” of Aron Gurwitsch on the Phenomenal Field. Human Studies, Dordrecht, v. 44, n. 1, p. 1-17, 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10746-020-09566-z.

EVANS, B.; FITZGERALD, R. The Categorial and Sequential Work of “Embodied Mapping” in Basketball Coaching. Journal of Pragmatics, Amsterdam, v. 118, n. 1, p. 81-98, 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2017.05.004.

FITZGERALD, R.; HOUSLEY, W. Identity, Categorization and Sequential Organization: The Sequential and Categorial Flow of Identity in a Radio Phone-In. Discourse & Society, London, v. 13, n. 5, p. 579-602, 2002. DOI: https://www.jstor.org/stable/42888521.

GARFINKEL, H. Ethnomethodological Misreading of Aron Gurwitsch on the Phenomenal Field. Human Studies, Dordrecht, v. 44, n. 1, p. 19-42, 2021 [1993]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10746-020-09566-z.

GARFINKEL, H. Ethnomethodology’s Program: Working Out Durkheim’s Aphorism. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2002.

GARFINKEL, H. Studies in Ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1967.

GARFINKEL, H.; SACKS, H. On Formal Structures of Practical Actions. In: MCKINNEY, J. C.; TIRYAKIAN, E. A. (ed.). Theoretical Sociology: Perspectives and Developments. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1970. p. 338-366.

GASS, S.; MACKEY, A.; ALVAREZ-TORRES, M.; FERNÁNDEZ-GARCÍA, M. The Effects of Task Repetition on Linguistic Output. Language Learning, Hoboken, v. 49, n. 4, p. 549-581, 1999. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.00102.

GURWITSCH, A. The Field of Consciousness. Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press, 1964.

HEAP, J. Discourse in the Production of Classroom Knowledge: Reading Lessons. Curriculum Inquiry, Abingdon, v. 15, n. 3, p. 245-279, 1985.

HELLERMAN, J. Classroom Interactive Practices for Literacy: A Microethnographic Study of Two Beginning Adult Learners of English. Applied Linguistics, Oxford, v. 27, n. 3, p. 377-404, 2006. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/ami052.

HERITAGE, J. Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity, 1984.

JEFFERSON, G. Transcript Notation. In: ATKINSON, M. J.; HERITAGE, J. (ed.). Structures of Social Action. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1984. p. ix-xvi.

KIM, H. The Form and Function of Next-Turn Repetition in English Conversation. Second Language Research, London, v. 38, n. 1, p. 51-81, 2002.

LEE, Y. Third Turn Position in Teacher Talk: Contingency and the Work of Teaching. Journal of Pragmatics, Amsterdam, v. 39, n. 1, p. 180-206, 2007. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2006.11.003.

MACBETH, D. Hugh Mehan’s Learning Lessons Reconsidered: On the Differences Between Naturalistic and Critical Analysis of Classroom Discourse. American Educational Research Journal, Thousand Oaks, v. 40, n. 1, p. 239-280, 2003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831204000123.

MACBETH, D. Classrooms as Installations: Direct Instruction in the Early Ages. In: HESER, S.; FRANCIS D. (ed.). Local Educational Order. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2000. p. 21-72.

MAJLESI, A. Matching Gestures - Teachers’ Repetitions of Students’ Gestures in Second Language Learning Classrooms. Journal of Pragmatics, Amsterdam, v. 76, n. 1, p. 30-45, 2014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.11.006.

MCHOUL, A. The Organization of Turns at Formal Talk in the Classroom. Language in Society, New York, v. 7, n. 2, p. 183-213, 1978. DOI: https://www.jstor.org/stable/4166997.

MEHAN, H. Learning Lessons. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1979a.

MEHAN, H. Structuring School Structure. Harvard Educational Review, Cambridge, v. 48, n. 1, p. 32-64. 1978. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.48.1.208101354lw53713.

MEHAN, H. “What Time is It, Denise?”: Asking Known Information Questions in Classroom Discourse. Theory into Practice, v. 18, n. 4, p. 285-294. 1979b.

MOLINARI, L.; MAMELI, C.; GNISCI, A. A Sequential Analysis of Classroom Discourse in Italian Primary Schools: The Many Faces of the IRF Pattern. British Journal of Educational Psychology, Hoboken, v. 83, n. 3, p. 414-430, 2013. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279.2012.02071.x.

MORELO, B.; MOUTINHO, R. Contando histórias: categorização de pertencimento e instruções-em-ação em um ambiente de ensino e aprendizagem de PLA. Revista Brasileira de Linguística Aplicada, Belo Horizonte, v. 21, n. 1, p. 155-195, 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/1984-6398202116044.

MOUTINHO, R. The Dynamic Layering of Relational Pairs in L2 Classrooms: The Inextricable Relationship Between Sequential and Categorial Analysis. Pragmatics, Amsterdam, v. 29, n. 4, p. 571-594, 2019. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1075/prag.17047.mou.

MOUTINHO, R. Using Publicly-Available Data as a Source of Inquiry in Video-Based Praxiological Analyses. In: GILL, M.; SCHORFHEIDE, C. (ed.). Sage Research Methods Cases. London: Sage, 2024. p. 1-25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781529683301.

NASSAJI, H.; WELLS, G. What’s the Use of ‘Triadic Dialogue’?: An Investigation of Teacher-Student Interaction. Applied Linguistics, Oxford, v. 21, n. 3, p. 376-406, 2000. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/21.3.376.

PARK, Y. The Roles of Third-Turn Repeats in Two L2 Classroom Interactional Contexts. Applied Linguistics, Oxford, v. 35, n. 2, p. 145-167, 2014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amt006.

PAYNE, G.; HUSTLER, D. Teaching the Class: The Practical Management of a Cohort. British Journal of Sociology of Education, Abingdon, v. 1, n. 1, p. 49-66, 1980.

POMERANTZ, A. Agreeing and Disagreeing with Assessments: Some Features of Preferred / Dispreferred Turn Shapes. In: ATKINSON, J. M.; HERITAGE, J. (ed.). Structures in Social Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984. p. 57-101.

ROH, T.; LEE, Y. Teacher Repetition as an Instructional Resource for Classroom Interaction: Three Pedagogical Actions in Kindergartens in an EFL Context. System, Oxford, v. 74, p. 121-137, 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2018.02.008.

SACKS, H. Lectures on Conversation. Oxford: Blackwell, 1992. v. 1.

SACKS, H. Notes on Methodology. In: ATKINSON, J. M.; HERITAGE, J. (ed.). Structures of Social Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984. p. 21-27.

SACKS, H. On the Analyzability of Stories by Children. In: GUMPERZ, J. J.; HYMES, D. (ed.). Directions in Sociolinguistics: The Ethnography of Communication. New York: Rinehart & Winston, 1972. p. 325-345.

SCHEGLOFF, E. Confirming Allusions: Toward an Empirical Account of Action. The American Journal of Sociology, Chicago, v. 102, n. 1, p. 161-216, 1996.

SCHEGLOFF, E. Practices and Actions: Boundary Cases of Other-Initiated Repair. Discourse Processes, Abingdon, v. 23, n. 3, p. 499-545, 1997. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01638539709545001.

SCHNEIDER, W.; CHEIN, J. Controlled & Automatic Processing: Behavior, Theory, and Biological Mechanisms. Cognitive Science, Hoboken, v. 27, n. 3, p. 525-559, 2003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0364-0213(03)00011-9.

SHIMANOFF, S.; BRUNAK, J. Repairs in Planned and Unplanned Discourse. In: KEENAN, E.; BENNETT, T. (ed.). Discourse Across Time and Space. Los Angeles: University of Southern California, 1977. p. 123-167.

SINCLAIR, J.; COULTHARD, R. M. Toward an Analysis of Discourse: The English Used by Teachers and Pupils. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1975.

SWANN, J.; DEUMERT, A.; LILIS, T.; MESTHRIE, R. A Dictionary of Sociolinguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2004. DOI: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.3366/j.ctvxcrv8w.

WATSON, D. R. Some General Reflections on ‘Categorization’ and ‘Sequence’ in the Analysis of Conversation. In: HESTER, S.; EGLIN, P. (ed.). Culture in Action: Studies in Membership Categorization Analysis. Washington: University Press of America, 1997. p. 49-75.

WATSON, R.; GASTALDO, E. Etnometodologia e análise da conversa. Petrópolis: Vozes, 2015.

WIEDER, D. L. Language and Social Reality: The Case of Telling the Convict Code. Paris: Mouton, 1974.

WONG, J. Repetition in Conversation: A Look at “First and Second Sayings”. Research on Language and Social Interaction, Abingdon, v. 33, n. 4, p. 407-424, 2000. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327973RLSI3304_03.