English Teacher Requesting Discourse in the EFL Classroom

  • Slides: 24
Download presentation
English Teacher Requesting Discourse in the EFL Classroom By Agis Andriani, S. Pd, M.

English Teacher Requesting Discourse in the EFL Classroom By Agis Andriani, S. Pd, M. Hum. 6/12/2016 Siliwangi University

Introduction • Requesting, a part of directive speech acts, exists in Pragmatics. • It

Introduction • Requesting, a part of directive speech acts, exists in Pragmatics. • It is the act to ask someone to do what the speaker wants in his utterances. This act involves the speaker and hearer with the context around them (Searle & Vanderveken, 1985; Tannen, 1995).

 • When a teacher utters, it means that she actually delivers a message,

• When a teacher utters, it means that she actually delivers a message, which can be implicitly or explicitly arisen in her words. This context of utterances is in classroom where the teacher talks in the teaching activities (Xiao-le, 2011).

 • Teacher’s talk of non-natives reflects the interaction of teacher and students with

• Teacher’s talk of non-natives reflects the interaction of teacher and students with non. English mother tongue. This talk creates the non-native teachers similarly have the same role in teaching, although they have their own styles in teaching (Medgyes, 1992; Candlin & Mercer, 2001; Llurda, 2005; Liu & Zhu, 2012). • Therefore, requesting is the result of teacher’s talk.

 • What are the strategies, moves, and modifications of requesting used by English

• What are the strategies, moves, and modifications of requesting used by English teacher in EFL Classroom based on her talk?

Method • Related to the focus, data, DCT and Observation. • Data are the

Method • Related to the focus, data, DCT and Observation. • Data are the talk of English teacher named requesting utterances. • DCT (Discouse Completion Test) is arranged based on the English teaching activities or situations in the classroom. • Observation is by audio visual recording of English teaching process.

DCT Example • Situation 1: You greet your students and check their attendance, but

DCT Example • Situation 1: You greet your students and check their attendance, but one of your student does not come. • You: Good morning. All right, I’ll check your attendance. Oh, one of your friends is absent. Do you know the reason?

 • After collecting the data through DCT and observation, the analysis of them

• After collecting the data through DCT and observation, the analysis of them is based on theory of requesting (Blum-Kulka, House & Kasper, 1989; Kasper & Blum-Kulka, 1993). • The theory categories what are strategies, moves and modifications in requesting.

 • The strategies are direct, conventionally indirect, and unconventionally indirect. • Supportive moves

• The strategies are direct, conventionally indirect, and unconventionally indirect. • Supportive moves are aggravating and mitigating. • Internal modifications are downgraders and upgraders. (Blum-Kulka, House & Kasper, 1989; Kasper & Blum-Kulka, 1993).

Finding and Discussion: strategies of requesting Strategies Direct Subtype Utterance Mood derivable Performatives Hedge

Finding and Discussion: strategies of requesting Strategies Direct Subtype Utterance Mood derivable Performatives Hedge performatives Want statement Baca! Iqro! Allright. I’d like to ask you to discuss within the group for reading comprehension. Page ninety, please. Page ninety Conventionally Indirect Suggestory formulae Query preparatory Don’t forget to do the assignment if you want to add your score. Do you understand my questions? Don’t you understand what I explained? Are you nervous? Nonconventionally Indirect Mild hints Strong hints So? Have you ever merayakan tujuh belas agustusan? Are you afraid to give questions? Don’t be afraid, don’t be nerveous. Once you try you’ll repeat that again. Ask me! Nanti diperbanyak fotokopinya.

 • These strategies function as effort of her to get attention from her

• These strategies function as effort of her to get attention from her students, deliver

Finding and Discussion: moves of requesting Supportive Moves Aggravating Mitigating Subtypes Threat Moralizing Utterance

Finding and Discussion: moves of requesting Supportive Moves Aggravating Mitigating Subtypes Threat Moralizing Utterance Banyak? But, can you guess the meaning of the words? Saya bilang tidak usah. Jangan dulu membuka kamus as long as you can predict the meaning you can guess the meaning. Gitu ya. Jadi jangan sampai satu kata yang tidak tahu…burn…ngaco…membuat the comprehension itu jadi kacau atau stuck kita membacanya. Ya Kang, Ya? Preparator Grounders Imposition minimizer Disarmers Getting a precommitment Ada lagi? Yang di belakang, what did you say? Are you afraid to give questions? Don’t be afraid, don’t be nerveous. Once you try, you’ll repeat that again. Ask me! I’m not sure with the answer but I promise to find out the answer of your questions. Next meeting I’ll tell you the answer I’ll repeat the questions, listen carefully and answer the questions. Come on, no question? I’m sure some of you would like to ask me but I don’t know what makes you silent. Udah belum? Any idea?

 • The moves are useful to let the hearer does what the speaker

• The moves are useful to let the hearer does what the speaker wants and get the early agreement to avoid the hearer’s rejection.

Finding and Discussion: internal modifications of requesting Internal Modifications Subtypes Utterances Downgraders Syntactic downgrader

Finding and Discussion: internal modifications of requesting Internal Modifications Subtypes Utterances Downgraders Syntactic downgrader Lexical downgrader Interrogatives Subjunctives Conditional clause Politeness Marker Subjectivizer Appealer Any idea? Kira-kira summary nya apa? Don’t forget to do the assignment if you want to add your score. Upgraders Time intensifier Repetition of request I’m not sure with the answer but I promise to find out the answer of your questions. Next meeting I’ll tell you the answer. If you’re sleepy you look so ugly. Attention, please! Ah, that’s easy dong? Come on, no question? I’m sure some of you would like to ask me but I don’t know what makes you silent. What are the keyword? What are the keywords?

 • The modifications are related to the felicity conditions (Holtgraves, 2008). Here, the

• The modifications are related to the felicity conditions (Holtgraves, 2008). Here, the certain situations are needed the certain utterances. In this case, the English teacher talks to give requesting as the part of instructions in the teaching learning process.

 • Therefore the finding gives several points to discuss: • Requesting and teaching

• Therefore the finding gives several points to discuss: • Requesting and teaching • Competence and performance in teaching • Ideal language teacher

 • Requesting and teaching: • The requesting identification starts the other phenomena in

• Requesting and teaching: • The requesting identification starts the other phenomena in teaching language. The phenomena are the use of other languages as the other tool of communication in the classroom. In this situation, the teacher uses not only English, but also Indonesian, Sundanese, and Arabic. • It is also to build relationship between teacher and students by giving instructions through requesting by involving not only the target language (English) but also the others which can be helpful in a certain condition. This means that this use of language, at the end, is only for the students’ achievement. (Escamilla & Hopewell in Lapp & Fisher, 2011; Candlin &Mercer, 2001; Matras (2009) Llurda, 2005, p. 123).

 • Competence and performance in teaching: • Teaching language needs skills and energy

• Competence and performance in teaching: • Teaching language needs skills and energy to improve the students’ abilities in mastering English. In short, a teacher is a model of language competence and performance in the classroom, no matter she is native or non-native. The execution of opportunities in the classroom are the realization of how a teacher manages the classroom into the good atmosphere to the students and those activities under the teacher’s attention will be effective to motivate the student. This positions the teacher as external motivator who build the student to change his behavior. In this way, she should be eager to struggle in facing the students’ complex needs and complicated characteristics ( Mc. Kay & Hornberger, 1996; Dornyei, 2001; Johnston, 2003; Llurda, 2004; Llurda, 2005; Dunne & Wragg, 2005; Richard 2011).

 • Ideal language teacher: • To talk in the classroom is one of

• Ideal language teacher: • To talk in the classroom is one of the teacher’s roles. This effort can give motivation to the students to pay attention and achieve the goal of learning. This statement is related to when someone wants to be a good teacher, she must fulfill some criteria including technical knowledge, pedagogical skills, interpersonal skills, and personal qualities (Brown, 2000; Ur in Richard & Renandya, 2002; Candlin & Mercer, 2001; Walsh, 2011; Murray & Christison 2011).

Conclusion • Requesting is a sign of the responsibility of teacher to guide students

Conclusion • Requesting is a sign of the responsibility of teacher to guide students to have ability in English which needs teacher’s competence in using language and this label is established by profiling the ideal language teacher.

 • This conclusion can be strengthened by doing the other discussions related o

• This conclusion can be strengthened by doing the other discussions related o how the politeness strategies used, the types of codes delivered, and how the response of the students in these activities. It is expected that the area can enrich the findings and summarized other information in teaching English as a Second/Foreign Language. • Besides, the suggestion will be widen on an investigation in which those factors of requesting can test the concept of ideal language teacher who can motivate students to develop their English ability.

References • Behrens, S. J &Parker, J. A. (2010. Language in the Real Word,

References • Behrens, S. J &Parker, J. A. (2010. Language in the Real Word, An Introduction to Linguistics. London, New York: Routledge Taylor &Francis Group • Blum-Kulka, S. , House, J. , & Kasper. (Ed. ). (1989). Cross-Cultural Pragmatics: Requests and Apologies, Vol XXXI in the series Advances in Discourse Process. New Jersey, USA: Ablex Publishing Corporation • • • Brown, D. H. (2000). Teaching by Principles, second edition. Longman, Pearson ESL • Holtgraves, T. (2008). Language as Social Action: Social Psychology and Language Use. New Jersey, USA: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates • Candlin, C. N. & Mercer, N. (Ed). (2001). English Language Teaching in its Social Context. London, UK: Routledge. Dornyei, Z. (2001). Motivational Strategies in the Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Dunne, R. &Wragg, T. (2005). Effective Teaching. London, New York: Routledge Harmer, J. (2001). The Practice of English Language Teaching, third edition. England: Longman Wesley Publishing Company Johnston, B. (2003). Values in English Language Teaching. Mahwah, New Jersey, London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publisher

 • • • • Lapp, D& Fisher, D. (Ed. ). (2011). Handbook of

• • • • Lapp, D& Fisher, D. (Ed. ). (2011). Handbook of Research on Teaching the English Language Arts (3 rd ed. ). New York, USA: Routledge Littlewood, W. (1981). Communicative Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Liu, M. & Zhu, L. (2012). An Analysis of Teacher Talk Time in College English Class. International Journal of English Linguistics, 2(5), by Canadian Center of Sciences and Education Llurda, E. (2004). Non-native Speaker Teachers and English as an International Language. In International Journal of Applied Linguistics, Vol 14(3), 2004. Blackwell Publishing, Ltd; USA ---------(Ed). (2005). Non-Native Language Teachers. Perceptions, Challenges, and Contributions to the Profession. USA; Springer Science+business media. Inc Kasper, G. &Blum-Kulka, S. (Ed. ). (1993). Interlanguage Pragmatics. New York, USA: Oxford University Press Matras, Y. (2009). Language Contact. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. • Mc. Goarty, M. (1996). Language Attitudes, Motivation, and Standard. In Mc. Kay &Hornberger (Ed. ), Sociolinguistics and Language Teaching. Cambridge University Press; Cambridge • Medgyes, P. (1992). Native or Non-Native: who’s worth more? In ELT Journal Volume 46/4 October. Oxford University Press [http: //203. 72. 145. 166/ELT/files/46 -4 -2. pdf][ May 20, 2014] • Miller, J. (Ed. ). (2009). Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Classrooms

 • Murray, D. E. & Christison, M. A. (2011). What English Teachers Need

• Murray, D. E. & Christison, M. A. (2011). What English Teachers Need to Know. Routledge; New York, USA; UK • Richard, J. C. (2011). Competence and Performance in Language Teaching. USA: Cambridge University Press. • Roberts, J. (1992). Face-Threatening Acts and Politeness Theory: Contrasting Speeches From Supervisory Conferences. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 7 (3), 287 -301 • Searle. J. R &Vanderveken, D. (1985). Foundations of Illocutionary Logic. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. • Tannen, D. (1995). The Power of Talk: Who gets Heard and Why. Harvard Business Review. Reprint 95510 • Ur, Penny. (2002). The English Teacher as Professional. In Richard, Jack. C &Willy A. Renandya (Ed. ), Methodology in Language Teaching. USA, New York: Cambridge University Press • Walsh, Steve. (2011). Exploring Classroom Discourse Language in Action. Oxon: Routledge • Xiao-le, G. (2011). The Effect of Explicit and Implicit Instructions of Requesting Strategies. Intercultural Communication Studies, XX(1), 104 -123