A01 cohe4573 01 se fm. Qxd

1
Discussion of stereotypes of L1 and L2 cultures and how those
stereotypes stem from differences in cultural norms in communication.
2
Comparison of typical L1 and L2 answers to the question, Did you have
a good weekend? and reading about cross-cultural frustrations
experienced by French and Australian English speakers.
17
Dörnyei and Thurrell (1998).
18
Bardovi-Harlig et al. (1991); Griswold (2003); Schegloff and Sacks (1973).
19
A caveat here is that at times CA is also conducted with elicited data (referred to as
“naturalistic data”), as in Félix-Brasdefer (2006).
20
Liddicoat and Crozet (2001).

---

1 7 2
T H E N U T S A N D B O L T S O F P R A G M A T I C S I N S T R U C T I O N
3
Discussion of the different features of conversation that the question
elicits in French and Australian English using transcribed authentic
dialogues.
4
Reconstruction of unscripted videotaped conversation in the L2.
5
Role-plays to practice L2 spoken grammar, vocabulary, and gestures.
6
Peer assessment as to the appropriateness of each other’s role-play
performance and concluding discussion.
The steps 1 to 3 above are characterized as an awareness-raising phase, 
step 4 an experimentation phase, step 5 a production phase, and step 6 a
feedback phase.
21
The second example focuses on the negotiation of refusals in Spanish
that involves multiple turns and frequent overlaps.
22
As in the first example,
university learners’ L1 English and L2 Spanish are often compared. In this
case, the steps were as follows:
1
Identification of speech acts using short samples.
2
Introduction of the range of politeness and (in)directness in negotiating
successful refusals.
3
Listening to naturalistic L1 and L2 refusals and discussion about the
politeness, (in)directness, insistence, expressions, and differences
observed in the samples.
4
Use of short, written samples from naturalistic data to examine refusal
strategies in terms of (in)directness and positive face (e.g., expressions
of empathy, positive statement, and agreement), and further small-
group discussion about preferred refusal strategies in terms of gender
and culture.
5
Analysis of the structure and organization of naturalistic discourse:
■
Identification of boundaries of sequences using CA transcripts
(opening sequence, refusal responses, and closing sequence).
■
Characterization of speech acts in each sequence.
■
Discussion about how refusal strategies are constructed across turns
and about the nuances that the strategies convey.
21
Liddicoat and Crozet (2001: 135– 8).
22
Félix-Brasdefer (2006).

---

D I S C O U R S E , I N T E R A C T I O N , A N D L A N G U A G E C O R P O R A
1 7 3
■
Analysis of turn-taking (timing, initiation, and termination of
turns).
■
Making inferences about the relationships, roles, and identities of
the speakers in the conversation.
6
Role-play practice and peer feedback about the refusal strategies used,
the appropriateness of the refusal, the distribution of sequences, and
the organization of turns.
The instruction involves cross-cultural awareness-raising (steps 1– 4), CA
(step 5), and production practice (step 6).
Adapting the model indicated in the second example above, the third
example applies the discourse analytic perspective to the teaching of
Japanese refusals. The following tasks (appearing bilingually in the students’
textbook) encourage learners to closely examine two transcripts that they
have already listened to: an offer–acceptance sequence and an offer–refusal
sequence (see the transcribed Dialogues 1 and 2, below).
23
Now let us take a closer look at the discourse structure. Examine the
transcripts of Dialogues 1 and 2 carefully and discuss the following in
a small group:
(a) What are the speakers doing in each turn? For example, is the
host mom’s first turn signaling an offer, a compliment, an
insistence, or a response to either one?
(b) How many turns does it take to realize the acceptance/refusal
sequence?
(c) Was the acceptance/refusal sequence realized directly or indirectly
in each dialogue? Why do you think so?
(d) Based on the way the offer–acceptance/refusal sequence is realized,
how would you characterize the relationship between the speakers?
How close/intimate or distant are they? How formal or informal is
the situation?
The teachers’ guide offers the following sample answers bilingually:
23
Ishihara and Maeda (2010).
▼

---