MASARYK UNIVERSITY BRNO
FACULTY OF EDUCATION
Department of English Language and Literature
Teaching Features of Informal Face-to-Face Conversation
Diploma Thesis
Brno 2011
Thesis Author: Bc. Šárka Kostelníčková
Thesis Supervisor: Doc. Mgr. Světlana Hanušová PhDr.
2
Hereby I state that I have worked on this diploma thesis on my own and that all the sources of
information I have used are listed in the bibliography.
March 17, 2011 Šárka Kostelníčková
3
My grateful thanks to Doc. Mgr. Světlana Hanušová PhDr. for her valuable advice and
comments she has provided me while working on the diploma thesis.
4
Contents
1. Introduction …………………………………………………………………………1
2. Part One ……………………………………………………………………………..4
2.1. Style ………………………………………………………………………………...4
2.1.1. Definition of Style ………………………………………………………………4
2.1.2. Stylistically Distinctive Features ………………………………………………..5
2.1.3. Dimensions of the Situational Constraint ………………………………….……6
2.1.4. The Functional Styles of English …………………………………………….….7
2.2. Conversation ………………………………………………………………………..9
2.2.1. Difference between Speech and Writing ………………………………………...9
2.2.2. Linguistic Analysis of Conversation ………………………………………...….10
2.2.3. Structure in Conversation …………………………………………………...…. 12
2.2.3.1. The Cooperative Principle …………………………………………………….. 13
2.2.3.2. Turn-taking ……………………………………………………………………. 13
2.2.3.3. Adjacency Pairs ……………………………………………………………….. 14
2.2.3.4. Discourse Markers …………………………………………………………….. 15
2.2.3.5. Politeness ……………………………………………………………………… 16
2.2.3.6. Vague Language and Informal Language ………………………………….….. 17
2.2.3.7. Conversational Routines …………………………………………………….… 17
2.2.3.8. Grammatical Features of Spoken Discourse ………………….…………….…. 18
2.3. Teaching Conversation ………………………………………………………….… 19
2.3.1. Second Language Learning/Acquisition ………………………….………….… 19
2.3.2. The Application of the Theoretical Approaches to Teaching English
Conversation …………………………………………………………………… 21
2.3.3. The Main Aim of Teaching English Conversation …………………………….. 23
2.3.4. Different Methods ……………………………………………………………… 23
2.3.5. Engage, Study and Activate Elements …………………………………………. 24
2.3.6. Pre-communicative and Communicative Activities …………………………… 25
2.3.7. Feedback ……………………………………………………………………….. 29
2.4. Summary of Part One ……………………………………………………………… 31
3. Part Two …………………………………………………………………………..... 32
3.1. Introduction to the Practical Part ………..…………………………………………. 32
5
3.2. Introductory Teaching Sequence …………………………………………………... 35
3.3. The Cooperative Principle ……………………………………………………...….. 42
3.3.1. Awareness ………………………………………………………………..…...… 42
3.3.2. Controlled Activity ………………………………………………………...…… 47
3.3.3. Fluency Activity ………………………………………………………………… 51
3.4. Turn-taking …………………………………………………………………………. 55
3.4.1. Awareness …………………………………………………………..……...…… 55
3.4.2. Controlled Activity ………………………………………………………...…… 60
3.4.3. Fluency Activity …………………………………………………………….……64
3.5. Discourse Markers ………………………………………………….…………...…. 67
3.5.1. Awareness ………………………………………………………………......…... 67
3.5.2. Controlled Activity ………………………………………….………………...... 71
3.5.3. Fluency Activity ……………………………………………..……………..…... 74
3.6. Summary of Part Two …………………………………………..……………..…... 77
4. Conclusion ………………………………………………………………..……...…. 78
References …………………………………………………………………..………. 81
Appendix ………………………………………………………………………..…... 84
6
1. Introduction
Conversation is the most ordinarily and most frequently used variety of English.
Generally speaking, all users of English are able to communicate somehow with others and
even very young learners, who have just started learning English, are able to make simple
English conversation, such as:
A: Hi.
B: Hi.
A: How are you?
B: Fine. And you?
A: Fine
B: Bye.
A: Bye.
English conversation, however, as dealt with in this thesis, is treated in a more sophisticated
way.
Firstly, the English language is not a homogenous phenomenon. It has to be understood as
a complex of a number of different varieties of one language, English, that are used in
different kinds of situations. These varieties have much in common, yet they are fairly
distinct. As far as the relevance of understanding style to language teaching is concerned, it is
necessary for a competent speaker of a language to have command of all these different
styles. The language of conversation is one of them. As it is the most ordinarily and
frequently used variety of English, it can serve as a suitable starting point for the gradual
development of such command. Communicative competence is composed not only of
grammatical competence, but also of sociolinguistic competence, and communication
strategies. It is necessary for learners to be able to make the choice of the appropriate forms
and expressions that depend on the context, a speaker‟s purposes and intentions. Nevertheless,
foreign learners of English lack the intuitive sense of linguistic appropriateness in English.
Consequently, such competence must be taught and learnt.
Secondly, there is a huge difference between authentic conversation and text book
conversation. Text book conversation is always topic-based, which means that the topic is
predetermined or it is incorporated into teaching as a means of practising and revising
7
grammar structures, which is unnatural. Also, speaking skills are taught rather than
conversation skills. Thus, learners are not aware of and familiar with features that characterize
authentic conversation. Therefore, they are not able to use them properly and the conversation
they make does not sound natural. It is true that in modern text books at least some features of
informal face-to-face conversation are included in text book conversation e.g. colloquial
words and expressions, voice-filled pauses, short forms or question tags; nevertheless, it is not
sufficient.
Furthermore, I started teaching the optional subject English Conversation at lower
secondary two years ago. It had not been taught before at our school. Therefore, I was
supposed to think of and create a new syllabus for this subject, which also included finding a
suitable course book. The matter of fact is, however, that I could not find a text book that
would offer a coherent syllabus for teaching English Conversation. Simply, none of the text
books included comprehensive and serried methodology for teaching English conversation
with all the features that conversation should consist of. Moreover, I have not even been able
to find out any activities that would acquaint pupils with the basic features of informal face-
to-face conversation. The types of students that the authors of books dealing with stylistics
have in mind are fairly advanced ones e.g. students at university.
I organized classes of English Conversation around a set of themes, e.g. daily routine,
family, my town or city, sports, shopping, travelling, food and drink etc. Nevertheless, very
soon I realized that I teach speaking rather than conversation, which I found unsatisfactory.
Also, I realized that although I have been studying English for many years, nobody had taught
me anything about different varieties of English or at least some basic rules and features of
English conversation till I started studying at university. I would have appreciated it.
Consequently, I have started searching for new ways of teaching English Conversation.
As I find communicative competence very important and situation with teaching
conversation to young learners, as I have experienced it, very unsatisfactory, I have decided to
choose the topic Teaching Features of Informal Face-to-Face Conversation as the topic of my
Diploma Thesis.
The main objective of the thesis is to devise and design a series of activities that will
contribute to the development and improvement of pupils´ communicative competence in
English. The teaching process is exemplified on teaching sequences that focus on features of
informal face-to-face conversation. The thesis is divided into two main parts. Part One is
theoretical. It focuses on linguistic information that provides the theoretical background and a
8
rationale for the development of activities and materials for the practical Part Two. It deals
with conversation from linguistic, mainly stylistic and pragmatic, point of view. It tries to
answer the question what makes conversation distinct from other varieties and what the main
stylistic markers of conversation are. Also, it concentrates on appropriate and suitable
teaching methods, techniques and activities that could provide learners with the opportunity to
grasp the regularities governing the proper use of features characteristic for conversation and
use the language for communicative purposes.
Part Two is oriented practically. It suggests a procedure that I find recommendable,
effective and useful when teaching features of informal face-to-face conversation to pupils at
lower secondary. It focuses on the development of learners´ abilities to take part in
conversation. The teaching process is exemplified on a series of teaching sequences. The
teaching sequences are graded from simple to complex. I have decided to design and use three
basic types of conversation practice - Awareness, Controlled Activities and Fluency Activities
for teaching basic features of informal face-to-face conversation, which will serve as a basis
for self-contained and coherent concept for the development of learners´ communicative
competence. The whole series starts with Introductory Teaching Sequence. All the sequences
include Engage, Study and Activate elements recommended by Harmer (“How to Teach
English” 51-8). The activities in Part Two are aimed at and designed for pupils at lower
secondary.
Definitely, there is not just one right or possible way of how to teach English
Conversation. What more, as I have stated previously, there is a lack of a coherent syllabus
for teaching English conversation to pupils at a primary school. On the other hand, there are a
number of books containing selective supplementary materials for lessons of English
Conversation. Also, teaching is always determined and influenced by teachers´ and learners´
needs, preferences and teaching and learning purposes. Thus, I try to present teaching features
of informal face-to-face conversation from my personal point of view. It is based on my
experience, opinions and knowledge.
9
2. Part One
2.1. Style
2.1.1. Definition of Style
Style is difficult to define and there are different approaches to a definition of style. Also,
the terminology used by different authors is far from unified.
Crystal and Davy distinguish “at least four commonly occurring senses of the term style”
(9). The first of the senses of style is the individual uniqueness. It refers to the individual style
of one person or to the style of a group of authors over a certain period. Also, the term style
can be used in an evaluative way, “referring to the effectiveness of a mode of expression”
(10). Moreover, the term may refer exclusively to literary language. In addition, the definition
of style may be approached from a functional point of view, which means that choices of
language means are related to the context of situation. However, the majority of approaches to
style agree that the basic or central concepts are those of selection and composition. In other
words, possibilities of conscious or unconscious selection from options existing in a language
and the particular ways of their arrangement constitute the style.
Vilém Mathesius understands by the term style “individual unifying character found in any
work resulting from intentional activity” (qtd. in Vachek 113). Leech and Short hold that style
“refers to the way in which language is used in a given context, by a given person, for a given
purpose…” (10). They adopt the Swiss linguist Saussure´s distinction between langue and
parole to clarify their definition. Langue is “the code or system of rules…of a language” and
parole is “the particular uses of the system, or selection from this system…” (10). Leech,
Deuchar and Hoogenraad point out that if speakers of a language want to use the language
appropriately, they have to be able to make “a choice between different options or different
language varieties” (6). Numerous criteria are involved in any use of language. According to
Leech, Deuchar and Hoogenraad (6-10), most of them may be grouped into criteria reflecting
dialect variation (varieties according to the user) and criteria reflecting register variation
(varieties according to the use). Register variation, which is also known as style is related to
specific circumstances and purposes within the act of communication and different contexts
and situations in which the communication takes place. It reflects functional variation related
to the features of the situational context – field (the activity in which language plays the part),
tenor (relationship between participants) and mode (the part language is playing). As far as
the choice of language is concerned, Palmer contributes to the discussion about style with the
10
semantic point of view. He maintains that a speaker‟s choice of linguistic variety must be
related to his/her recognition of the relevance of context. “If so, issues of code-switching,
diglossia, dialect, sociolinguistics and stylistics all fall into the (widely defined) area of
semantics” (Palmer 65).
2.1.2. Stylistically Distinctive Features
As foreign learners of English lack the intuitive sense of linguistic appropriateness, they
need to develop and continually improve a sense of style, which means the ability to
recognize and characterize the patterns differentiating one variety of English from another and
to decide what alternatives he/she should use and what ignore. The main aim of stylistic
approach is to indicate both the formal linguistic features which characterize different
language varieties and restrictions on their use.
Special attention is paid to features, the use of which is restricted to a certain kind of social
context. By feature, Crystal and Davy mean “any bit of speech or writing which a person can
single out from the general flow of language and discuss” (11). Crystal and Davy call such a
feature a stylistically significant or distinctive feature. Stylists explain why these features are
used in a certain context over others that could have, but have not been chosen. Thus, stylists
are not concerned with all the forms and structures in a text, but rather with “those which
stand out in it” (Verdonk 6).
These conspicuous, prominent or deviant elements guarantee the stylistic relevance of the
text. This psychological effect is called foregrounding. “Foregrounded elements include a
distinct patterning or parallelism in a text‟s typography, sounds, word choices, grammar, or
sentence structure” (Verdonk 6). In other words, foregrounding results from deviation from
the linguistic norms. Deviance is defined as “a purely statistical notion: as the difference
between the normal frequency of a feature and its frequency in the text or corpus (Leech and
Short 39). Primary norms are rules of English in general; rules that “determine our more
general expectations of language” (Leech and Short 44). Secondary norms are the norms of
the language varieties. Thus, foregrounding may be “qualitative, i.e. deviation from the code
itself or quantitative i.e. deviance from some expected frequency” (Leech and Short 39).
Automatization then is defined by Havránek as “such use of the devices of the language, in
isolation or in combination with each other, as is usual for a certain expressive purpose, that
is, such a use that the expression itself does not attract any attention” (152) in its context of
11
use. That is to say, the foregrounded feature (a style marker of the relevant style) is also
automatized in this context of style and hence it is common and expected.
2.1.3. Dimensions of the Situational Constraint
Once some features are recognized to be stylistically significant or distinctive, the extra-
linguistic context is examined to identify any situational factors, which might impose
restrictions on their use. As it has been stated previously, English linguists approach style
mainly from a functional point of view and agree that choices of language means are related
to the context of situation. Also, they mostly agree with using the terms dialect and register
variations. Register is used to refer to situational variation. Crystal and Davy, however, break
down the notion of situation into eight dimensions of situational constraint. “The role of
every feature plays is described in terms of one or more of these dimensions” (Crystal and
Davy 64). These constraints determine language varieties or different styles. There are
relatively permanent features of language – individuality, dialect and time in the first type of
these dimensions, which are in accordance with the previously mentioned term dialect. The
second type is called discourse, which includes variation given by medium (the difference
between speech and writing) and participation (difference between monolog and dialog).
They correspond to mode element. The third type consists of relatively temporary features of
language – province, status, modality and singularity, which are analogous with the term
register.
There are other characteristics of the context that affect the choice of language. (…)
Apart from the style of the individual (which they call SINGULARITY), Crystal & Davy
(1969:71-6) have suggested three main features of style – PROVINCE, STATUS and
MODALITY. Province is concerned with occupation and professional activity – the
language of law, science, advertising etc. Status deals (again) with social relations, but
especially in terms of the formality of language and the use of polite or colloquial
language or slang. Joos (1962) suggested there were five degree of formality – „frozen‟,
„formal‟, „consultative‟, „casual‟ and „intimate‟. Modality (though GENRE is a better term
in view of the more normal use of the term modality in 6. 8) is intended to relate to the
choice between poetry and prose, essay and short story, the language of memoranda,
telegrams, jokes etc. (Palmer 64)
12
2.1.4. Functional Styles in English
As far as the terminology for the identification of language varieties or styles is concerned,
it is far from unified. The terms that are used most frequently by the majority of scholars are
those of ´register´ and ´functional styles´. Functional styles are the subsystems of language,
where each subsystem has its own peculiar features. Their appearance and existence is
connected with the specific conditions of communication in different spheres of human life.
According to I.R. Galperin, “a functional style of language is a system of interrelated
language means which serves a definite aim in communication”(“Functional Styles of
English”). He treats functional styles as patterns of the written variety of language thus
excluding colloquial functional style. He distinguishes the belles-lettres, the publicistic,
newspaper, scientific prose and official document functional styles. I.V. Arnold includes
colloquial functional style into his classification of functional styles. He distinguishes poetic,
scientific, newspaper and colloquial styles. A.N. Morokhovsky, O.P. Vorobyova, N.I.
Likhosherst, Z.V. Timoshenk state that there are official, business, scientific-professional,
public, literary colloquial and familiar colloquial styles.
For the purpose of this thesis, I have decided to draw upon Dontcheva-Navratilová´s thesis
Style Markers of Diplomatic Discourse: Text Analysis of UNESCO Resolutions. She uses the
term ´functional style´ as the general classification of situational varieties of English. Each
functional style includes sub-styles that are called ´registers´ and for which the presence of
style markers is characteristic. Dontcheva-Navratilová suggests “a classification of the
functional styles in English which reflects the functions that the language fulfils in the
different styles as well as the situational factors influencing the choice of language means”
(44). The classification is shown in Figure 1 below. As the classification suggests, conversation
is one of the four major functional styles, which includes as sub-styles or registers telephone
conversation and face-to-face conversation.
13
Fig. 1. Classification of English Pragmatic Styles1
1 According to Dontcheva-Navrátilová, the style of literary works is not included here, because language
“functions as a secondary semiotic system” (45) here, whereas it “functions as a primary semiotic system” (45)
in the pragmatic functional styles and all pragmatic styles might be used in the style of literary works.
PRAGMATIC FUNCTIONAL STYLES
SCIENTIFIC PROSE ADMINISTRATIVE
STYLE PUBLICISM CONVERSATION
ACADEMIC
POPULAR
JOURNALISM
ADVERTISING
PUBLIC
SPEAKING
PUBLIC
ADMINISTRATION
LEGAL
BUSINESS
MILITARY
DIPLOMATIC
FACE-TO-FACE
TELEPHONE
G E N R E S
rEs
14
2.2. Conversation
2.2.1. Difference between Speech and Writing
The difference between speech and writing reflects variation given by Crystal and Davy´s
medium (“Investigating English Style” 64-83) and it corresponds to the contextual factor
mode.
The use of speech is more frequent; however, functions of speech and writing are
complementary. Spoken language is transitory and it is produced in real time, whereas writing
is permanent and no time restrictions are imposed on participants. In speech, participants have
limited time to plan and produce speech; nevertheless, they have opportunities to ask for
clarification, repetition or explanation. Also, non-linguistic noises, gestures and facial
expressions are frequently used in speech.
One of the main functions of speech is the phatic2, which is “displayed in utterances
seeking to establish, to maintain or to end communication, to check whether the channel
works…” (Dontcheva-Navrátilová, “Grammatical Structures in English” 15). Other functions
used are mainly the emotive (expression of inner states, emotions and attitudes of the
addresser); the conative (seeking to affect addressee‟s behaviour) and the referential
(exchange of information). In written language, the main referential function is complemented
by the conative, metalingual (talking about language, repairing misunderstanding) and poetic
(the particular form chosen) functions.
The segmentation and organization of language is achieved by prosody i.e. intonation in
speech, whereas written language uses punctuation and paragraphing. Writing is fluent, while
non-fluency, e.g. hesitation, pauses, fillers, false starts or unfinished sentences, is typical of
speech. Furthermore, grammatical structures tend to be simpler in speech than in writing.
Spoken discourse is characterized by lexical sparsity (about 75% grammatical words), as
opposed to lexical density (about 40% grammatical words) in written discourse. Spoken
language is inexplicit and repetitiveness occurs, while written language is explicit and
therefore repetitiveness is unlikely to appear. There are informality features in spoken
language, as opposed to formality features in written language. Finally, monitoring and
interaction features are present only in spoken discourse.
2 The classification of language functions by Jacobson is used here.
15
2.2.2. Linguistic Analysis of Conversation
Conversation is “any interactive spoken exchange between two or more people” (Pridham
2). Two types of conversation can be distinguished. One type is face-to-face exchanges e.g. a
private conversation between two members of a family or a more public, ritualised and formal
conversations e.g. between two politicians. The other type is non-face-to-face exchanges e.g.
a telephone conversation. The participants are not visible to each other during a telephone
conversation. Consequently, the telephone conversation differs from the face-to-face
conversation. As the main focus of this thesis is an informal face-to-face conversation, it
leaves aside both formal face-to-face and telephone conversations.
As everyone uses informal face-to-face conversation every single day in a wide range of
situations, it is the most commonly used and the least situationally marked variety of English.
Other varieties are restricted to and associated with a particular situation. “Conversational
English has no comparable situational specificity”(Crystal and Davy 97). Moreover, various
structures may be used with only very few restrictions.
Stylistic analysis discusses a particular piece of language or text “in terms of a number of
interrelated levels of description” (Crystal and Davy 15). It studies various aspects of the way
in which language is organized. Five levels of stylistic analysis may be isolated – semantic,
phonological/graphological, grammatical, lexical and discourse.
As far as typical features of conversation at a semantic level are concerned, three factors
seem to be central – the inexplicitness, randomness of subject matter and a lack of planning
and normal non-fluency. Firstly, as participants rely on the extra-linguistic context and their
shared knowledge, the inexplicitness occurs. It is manifested by the “frequent use of apparent
ambiguities” (Crystal and Davy 103) e.g. anaphoric features and vague language. Secondly, a
high proportion of utterances is incomplete. Some utterances are also phonologically obscure.
Other features that contribute to the inexplicitness of conversation are connected with a
common personal background of participants. The more they know each other, the more they
rely on abbreviated forms, family jokes, in-slang subtle references etc.
In informal face-to-face conversation, participants have nearly no time to prepare what
they want to say in advance and a range of topics that are not predetermined is covered. This
unpredictability of topics is optional, because it is possible for everyone to choose or change
the subject at any place or time. According to Crystal and Davy, “this potential for change…is
the important feature of this variety”(104). Another significant fact is that in informal
conversation any kind of language may occur, e.g. complete switches in accent or dialect,
16
very formal language, colloquial words, slang etc. without its being linguistically
inappropriate. This “juxtaposition of usually separated linguistic features” (Crystal and Davy
104) is found solely in conversation, to which it is a major characteristic.
The third general feature is normal non-fluency. It is reflected in a very high proportion of
errors, slips of the tongue, hesitation features and overlapping or simultaneous speech. The
occurrence of such features is considered to be common and thus expected and tolerated.
Regarding the phonetic level of the analysis, anybody may participate in conversation and
consequently the range of voice qualities is random and there is no pattern. The only regularly
occurring features are “sounds from different air-stream mechanism and other configurations
of the vocal tract” (Crystal and Davy 105) such as vocalisations, whistles, artificial clearing of
the throat, coughing for irony etc. and the use of onomatopoetic words. Other features include
regular use of assimilations and elisions, frequent use of words with abnormal syllabic
structure, the occurrence of the entire range of prosodic and paralinguistic effects etc.
Tone-units may be of any length and very often they are incomplete. Voiceless pauses are
much more frequent than voiced and they occur randomly. Furthermore, contrastive tonicity
is frequent, which correlates with highly frequent compound tones, mainly fall-plus-rise,
however, various kinds of tones appear in conversation. In addition, “the tempo is
characteristically uneven within and between utterances” (Crystal and Davy 108) and the
speed of conversation is quite fast. Also, there are variations in loudness to indicate the
importance of some points over others.
As far as grammatical level is concerned, utterances and sentences are not so clearly
definable in conversation, as they are in other varieties and their length is much more variable.
The problem with delimiting sentences from each other arises. Crystal and Davy maintain that
“informal conversation is characterised by a large number of loosely coordinated clause, the
coordination being structurally ambiguous” (110).
Secondly, there is a high proportion of parenthetic compound types of sentences in
conversation e.g. you know, you see or I mean. Other grammatical features that characterize
conversation include frequent use of interrogative and infrequent use of imperative sentence
types, overt, inter-sentence linkage, e.g. personal pronouns, articles and determiners and
common vocatives. Subjects tend to be simple and especially personal pronouns I and you are
used. Both noun and verb phrases tend to be uncomplicated and simple. Furthermore, the
occurrence of contracted verbal forms is highly distinctive. Informal filler verbs and phrasal
verbs are common in conversation. Active voice is used much more than passive. A final
17
point to be made is that both favoured and condemned forms are likely to be present and,
more importantly, acceptable in conversation.
Vocabulary is one of the most noticeable aspects of informal conversation. The structure of
words tends to be simple and specialized and formal terms are replaced by non-specific prop
words e.g. thingummy or what-do-you-call-it, which function as noun phrases. Collocations,
clichés and in-group slang are common. Furthermore, this variety is characterized by “a great
deal of lexical hyperbole” (Crystal and Davy 114) and by the occurrence of familiar
euphemism. In addition, humorous items are deliberately introduced.
An effort to interpret and the way how it is accomplished are “the key elements
investigated in the study of discourse” (Yule, “The Study of Language” 125). Language users
rely not only on linguistic forms and structures, but also on more knowledge than that.
Discourse analysis deals with questions how participants in a conversation successfully
interpret what others intend to convey, how they make sense of it, how they recognize well-
constructed conversation, how they understand speakers who communicate more than literally
conveyed by words etc. The key terms in the discourse analysis are those of cohesion and
coherence. Cohesion is visible and objective property of a text; the semantic and formal
relations between elements of a discourse. Cohesive relations are of three types – grammatical
(conjunctions, reference, ellipsis, substitution), lexical (repetition, sense relations) and
structural (theme-focus organisation, given-new information, parallelism). Coherence is
subjective and not visible. It is “the unity of meaning and communicative purpose perceived
in discourse in a context of use” (Dontcheva-Navrátilová, “Grammatical Structures in
English”, 29). Consequently, the discourse level concentrates on cohesive devices used in
conversation e.g. discourse markers and structure of conversation e.g. the opening section,
topic shift markers, devices used for promoting the coherence etc.
2.2.3. Structure in Conversation
This section deals with features of informal face-to-face conversation that will serve as a
basis for the practical Part Two. These features are entirely typical of this language variety
and used to structure it, yet, they are taught either partially and treated as a matter of
peripheral importance during customary lessons of English at primary schools or they are not
taught at all. Consequently, pupils are not familiar with them and are not able to use them.
It is vital and advisable for foreign learners of English to familiarize themselves with and be
aware of basic rules of conversation (norms), if learners want to be successful in conversation.
18
In other words, if they ignore or violate the norms, the communication will fail. Wardhaugh
states that “normative behaviour is expected behaviour” (14). It is not only expected, but also
required.
2.2.3.1. The Cooperative Principle
Conversation is a cooperative undertaking. Each time people are involved in conversation
they must consider each other and cooperate. The assumption of cooperation has so pervasive
influence on conversation that “it can be stated as a cooperative principle of conversation and
elaborated in four sub-principles” ((Yule, “Pragmatics” 37) called Grice´s maxims. These
maxims are expected to be obeyed by participants during conversation. In other words,
participants interpret language on the assumption that the participants obey the maxim of
quality (be true), the maxim of quantity (be brief – do not talk too much or too little), the
maxim of relevance (be relevant) and the maxim of manner (be clear) (Pridham 37-9). If
speakers are “in danger of not fully adhering to the (cooperative) principles” (Yule,
“Pragmatics” 38), there are certain kinds of expressions available to indicate it, e.g. as far as I
know, as you probably know, this may be a bit confused etc. Such expressions are called
hedges.
Furthermore, pieces of information do not have to be conveyed literally in words. Speakers
very often imply something that is not actually said. This additional conveyed meaning is
called implicature.
2.2.3.2. Turn-taking
People work together at building and structuring conversation. They need to know when to
speak or stay silent, how to allow everyone adequate and timely opportunity to speak, how to
gain a turn etc. One of the basic rules is that people take turns during a conversation. Turn-
taking is an important organisational tool in conversation.
To describe the conversation structure, Yule uses an analogy with the workings of a
market economy (“Pragmatics” 72). The right to speak is a commodity called the floor. A turn
means having control of the floor. Anyone may get control of the floor, which is called turn-
taking. In this metaphor, Yule compares turn-taking to a local management system, because
all members of a social group know it conventionally. The system is a set of conventions for
getting turns, keeping or giving them away. This set of conventions is essential at points
19
where there is a possible change in who has the turn. It is called a Transition Relevance Place
(TRP). Thus, participants in conversation are described as taking turns at holding the floor.
Yule holds that “they accomplish change of turn smoothly because they are aware of the local
management system for taking those turns at an appropriate TRP” (“Pragmatics” 72).
Usually, only one participant speaks at a time and others wait until he/she indicates the end
of his/her turn. Nevertheless, sometimes also overlapping and simultaneous speech occur.
Pridham states that about “5% of the speech stream is delivered in overlap” (3). A so called
completion point signals that a participant has finished. A turn can be marked as complete “in
a number of ways: by asking a question…or by pausing at the end of a completed syntactic
structure like a phrase or sentence” (Yule, “The Study of Language” 128). On the other hand,
if a participant wants to keep a turn, he/she avoids having a completion point occur by using
connectors at the end of sentences, placing pauses at points where a message is incomplete or
by producing filled pauses (er, em, ah, you know etc.)
2.2.3.3. Adjacency Pairs
Adjacency pairs is a term that can be defined as “the way in which conversations can be
segmented into pairs of exchanges that are connected in some way even though spoken by
different speakers” (“An Alphabet of Conversational Features”). They help in the structuring
of a conversation and they have “strong in-build expectations” (Prigham 27). Yule maintains
that “the utterance of a first part immediately creates an expectation of the utterance of a
second part of the same pair” (“Pragmatics” 77). The most frequently used adjacency pair is
question-answer. Statements are acknowledged, complaints replied to, greetings exchanged
etc. Also, one adjacency pair may be incorporated into another. It is called an insertion
sequence. Not only an insertion section, but also adjacency triplets can occur. They are known
as exchanges and consist of initiation, response and follow-up. Follow-ups are extremely
frequent in English.
Adjacency pairs represent social actions, however, all social actions are not considered to
have the same status, when they occur as a second part of the pair. Some of them are more
probable, expected and preferred. It is called preference. Yule explains that this “term is used
to indicate a socially determined structural pattern and does not refer to any individual‟s
mental or emotional desires” (“Pragmatics” 79).
20
2.2.3.4. Discourse Markers
Discourse markers are words or expressions that signpost the structure of a conversation.
The term discourse markers refers to elements like well, so, I mean, you know, you see etc.
They help hearers orientate themselves in the conversation and understand what is being said.
Discourse markers themselves have no meaning. Stubbs explains that “the function of a
discourse marker is to relate utterances to each other or to mark a boundary in the discourse”
(qtd. in Pridham 30). There are four basic features that characterize discourse markers:
(1) they do not affect the truth conditions of an utterance;(2) they do not add anything to
the propositional content of an utterance; (3) they are related to the speech situation and
not to the situation talked about; and (4) they have an emotive, expressive function,
rather than a referential, denotative, or cognitive function. (Hölker, qtd. in Jucker 436)
The discourse marker well has four basic distinct uses. Firstly, it can be used as a marker
of insufficiency, when a speaker senses that he/she fails to give a piece of information that is
required. Secondly, it is used as a face-threat mitigator. Jucker explains that “well indicates a
problem on the interpersonal level” (442) when the face of a speaker or hearer may be
threatened, e.g. before the refusal of a request. Thirdly, well as a frame „is used to separate
discourse units”(Jucker 446). It indicates a shift of a topic or introduces reported direct
speech. Furthermore, well can be used as a delay device when a speaker needs more time to
think about his/her answer.
Comment clauses (I mean, you see, I think, you see) are considered to be parenthical
disjuncts, occurring initially, medially or finally; usually having a separate tone unit. Quirk
adds that they are “either content disjuncts expressing the speaker‟s comment on what he/she
says in the matrix clause, or style disjuncts conveying the speaker‟s view on the way he/she is
speaking (qtd. in Stenström 291).
Stenström summarizes the main functions of these pragmatic expressions. She states that
you know and you see “mark transitions in information state, relevant for participation
framework” and “I mean and I think mark speaker orientation toward own talk; i.e.
modification of ideas and intentions” (294). Also, you know and you see are used to gain
attention from hearers, whereas I mean and I think are used to maintain attention on speakers.
Some specific functions include the use of I think as a hedge, when it expresses tentativeness.
I mean “can be used as a mistake editor and as a device for introducing clarifications,
21
explanations and additional information” (Stenström 295). You know indicates shared
knowledge, attracts attention or invites agreement. You see is used as a demand for
understanding hearing.
All these pragmatic expressions are very frequent in informal face-to-face conversation.
They are context and situation dependent. Furthermore, they are “person-to-person oriented
and socially required” (Stenström 298). They can be deleted syntactically, but pragmatically
they are required. Erman adds that they are “addressed to the listener”, however, “the listener
seldom responds to them…, at least not verbally” (146).
2.2.3.5. Politeness
Generally, politeness means being tactful, modest and nice to other people. Linguistically,
however, it deals with the concept of ´face´ or public self-image. Thus, politeness is defined
as “showing awareness of and consideration for another person‟s face” (Yule, “The Study of
Language” 119). Face-threatening and face-saving acts are distinguished. If people say
something that “represents a threat to another person‟s self-image” (Yule, “The Study of
Language” 119), e.g. the use of a direct speech act (e.g. directives to force someone to do
something), it is considered to be a face-threatening act. Especially requests presented in an
indirect way, e.g. in the form of a question, are considered to be more polite and suitable.
Whenever something lessening the possible threat to another‟s face is said, it is described as a
face-saving act.
Four syntactic sentence types (forms) – declaratives, interrogatives, imperatives and
exclamatives and four discourse functions – statements, questions, directives and
exclamations are distinguished. Direct association between a syntactic type and discourse
function is a norm; nevertheless, they do not always match. If a declarative structure is used
with the function of a statement (interrogative structure with the function of a question,
imperatives with the function of directives and exclamatives with the function of
exclamations), it is described as a direct speech act. If the forms do not match with the
functions, e.g. an interrogative structure is used with the function of directives; it results in an
indirect speech act.
22
2.2.3.6. Vague Language and Informal Language
The use of vague language is an important aspect of communicative competence. Native
English speakers use it very often in a conversation, especially “when they are unable or
unwilling to give accurate information, or they think it is either unnecessary or socially
inappropriate to do so” (“Vague Language”). Also, a less definite statement may be felt to be
more polite. List completers, e.g. other things like that, and stuff like that, and things;
placeholders, e.g. a thingummy, whatsisname, thingy, whatsit; and quantities, e.g. loads of,
around, or so, about are most frequently used.
Also, there are many differences of vocabulary between formal and informal English.
Informal language is mainly of Anglo-Saxon origin, whereas formal language is of French,
Latin or Greek origin.
2.2.3.7. Conversational Routines
Some phrases, expressions or sentences are of the formula character, which means that
nothing can be changed in them; they are fixed, e.g. how do you do, I am sorry etc. These
formulas are important for language acquisition, communicative competence, language
performance and foreign language learning. Aijmer states that they “are closely bound to a
special function or communication situation” (1). There are idioms, proverbs, stock phrases,
catchphrases, quotations, idiomatic similes and discoursal expressions (conversational
routines). Aijmer maintains that conversational routines “include a variety of phrases which
are frequent in spoken language such as swear words, exclamations, greetings, polite
responses, discourse-organizing formulas of different kinds and ´small talks´ “ (2). They can
be grouped into three classes. Thanking, apologizing, requesting, offering, greeting and
complimenting form one group and serve as “automatic responses to recurrent features of the
communication situation” (Aijmer 2). The second group consists of routines that help to
organize the discourse e.g. connectives and ´conversational gambits´ with the function of
opening a conversation. The third group includes routines that express speakers´ attitudes and
emotions.
23
2.2.3.8. Grammatical Features of Spoken Discourse
Grammatical competence is one of a set of composite skills on which communicative
competence rests. If students want to communicate certain meanings in certain situations or
contexts and be successful in communication, they need to know what forms are appropriate
for a given situation and should, therefore, be chosen. Leech and Svartvik state that “grammar
is flexible enough to offer a considerable choice in these matters” (8). General features of
English, so called common core of the language, are found in all varieties of English. In other
words, the common core can be used in all varieties. However, there are also features that are
either rather formal or informal. Informal features are likely to appear in informal face-to-face
conversation. As it has been stated previously, some grammatical features of spoken English
are e.g. tag questions, ellipsis, coordination, finite clauses, signposts and contracted forms.
For the purpose of this thesis, this section deals only with question tags and ellipsis.
Tag questions are highly typical features of speech. They contribute to the cooperative
principle and to the turn-taking. As tag questions are shortened yes-no questions, a speaker
“asserts something, then invites the listener‟s response” (Leech and Svartvik 14). Carter and
McCarthy add that tags are “particularly appropriate to contexts in which meanings are not
simply stated but are negotiated and re-negotiated” (18).They consist of an operator
depending on the preceding verb phrase plus a pronoun that repeats or refers back to the
subject of the statement. There are two main types – positive + negative and negative +
positive.
Another pervasive grammatical characteristic of informal talk is ellipsis. Leech and
Svartvik maintain that it “helps to create the sort of relaxed atmosphere that we try to achieve
in a cooperative social situation” (15). Ellipsis in conversation is situational, which means that
it affects people and things in the immediate situation. It involves “the omission of personal
subjects, where it is obvious that the speaker remains unambiguous” (Carter and McCarthy
14). It is used mainly with verbs of mental process, e.g. think, guess, wonder etc.
Furthermore, it occurs with main or auxiliary verbs where the meaning can be reconstructed
from the context. There are also elliptical fixed expressions that occur as frozen lexical
routines, e.g. sounds strange, absolutely right, seems worth it etc.
24
2.3. Teaching Conversation
2.3.1. Second Language Learning/Acquisition
All people acquire their mother tongue without overt instruction, that is to say
subconsciously. Yule explains that “there is an innate predisposition in the human infant to
acquire language”, however, “this inborn language capacity is not enough” (“The Study of
Language” 149). Interaction with other users of a language is required and the importance of
cultural transmission and a particular language-using environment is identified. The
acquisition of a native (first) language is largely automatic and straightforward. Yule states
that “by the age of five, the child has completed the greater part of the basic language
acquisition process and, according to some; the child is then in a good position to start
learning a second (foreign) language” (“The Study of Language” 159). Nevertheless, Yule
argues that “the optimum age for learning may be during the years from about ten to sixteen
when the flexibility of our inherent capacity for language has not been completely lost, and
the maturation of cognitive skills allows a more effective analysis of the regular features of
the L2 being learned” ( “The Study of Language” 159). Consequently, the question arises how
much experience from the acquisition/learning a native language could or should be copied in
learning a second language.
As far as the second language learning is concerned, the distinction is usually made
between learning and acquisition. Acquisition is defined as “the gradual development of
ability in a language by using it naturally in communicative situations with others who know
the language”, whereas learning is “a more conscious process of accumulating knowledge of
the features, such as vocabulary and grammar, of a language, typically in an institutional
setting” (Yule, “The Study of Language” 163).
There are several theoretical perspectives that have been proposed to explain second
language acquisition and that are relevant to teaching English conversation. Some theories
“give primary importance to learners´ innate capacity for language acquisition; some
emphasize the essential role of the environment” (Lightbown and Spada 29); and others try to
integrate both these factors into an explanation of the second language acquisition.
Language learning is explained as “the formation of good language ´habits´ through
repeated reinforcement” (Thornbury, “How to Teach Speaking” 38) by behaviourism. Three
stages of language learning were called presentation, practice and production in its
popularized form – audiolingualism. According to behaviourism, learners receive linguistic
25
input in their environment and form associations between words and objects or events that
become stronger as experiences are repeated. Moreover, the second language learning “starts
off with the habits formed in the first language”(Lightbown and Spada 34). Habits from L1
interfere with new L2 habits, which is why behaviourism was lined to Contrastive Analysis
Hypothesis.
The innatists´ account for second language acquisition rejects the behaviourists´ view.
Chomsky argued that “innate knowledge of the Universal Grammar permits all children to
acquire the language of their environment during a critical period of their development”
(Lightbown and Spada 35). Although Chomsky did not made specific claims about
implications of the theory for second language learning and linguists´ opinions about it vary
greatly, his theory has had a great influence on second language teaching practice. Stephen
Krashen, who was influenced by Chomsky‟s theory, gives prominence to acquisition. He
described his Monitor model in terms of five hypotheses – the acquisition-learning, monitor,
natural order, input and affective filter hypotheses. He suggests that acquisition “requires
meaningful interactions in the target language – natural communication – in which speakers
are concerned not with the form of their utterances but with the messages they are conveying
and understanding” (1). He argues that explicit teaching of rules and error correction are not
relevant to language acquisition. Language learning is useful and justifiable only when used
to check and correct utterances that have been uttered.
On the other hand, Harmer assumes that “the ability to acquire language easily tends to
deteriorate with age” (“How to Teach English” 47). He maintains that learning a foreign
language happens under different condition than acquisition of a mother tongue. A child
acquires language gradually and step by step from one-word utterances to complex sentences.
He/she is exposed to language all the time and in real-life situations. Furthermore, learners of
English “have perfectly good reasoning power and may want to think consciously about how
language works” (Harmer, “How to Teach English” 47).
A cognitivist account of language learning “credits learners with an information processing
capacity”(Thornbury, “How to Teach Speaking” 38). Lightbown and Spada maintain that
second language acquisition is seen by cognitive psychologists as “the building up of
knowledge systems that can eventually be called on automatically for speaking and
understanding”(39). Conscious attention is paid to the learning of the individual stages and,
through experience and practice; certain parts of knowledge are called on automatically,
which frees learners to focus on other aspects of the language. Also, there are “changes in
skill and knowledge which are due to ´restructuring´”(Lightbown and Spada 40), which
26
means that sometimes things learners know and use are explainable on the basis of the
interaction of knowledge they “already have, or on the acquisition of new knowledge which –
without extensive practice - somehow fits into an existing system and causes it to be
transformed” (Lightbown and Spada 40). Thornbury explains that “cognitivist theory replaced
the PPP model with one that progresses from awareness-raising, through proceduralization,
to autonomy” (“How to Teach Speaking” 39). The only difference is that awareness-raising
suggests an explicit focus on the rules, whereas practice demands imitating models without
attention to the rules.
Connectionists claim that the environment plays the most important role in second
language learning and that innate is only the ability to learn. Learners are exposed to instances
of the linguistic features they eventually learn; they form associations between the linguistic
elements. The input is “principal source of linguistic knowledge”(Lightbown and Spada 41).
Interactionist theories argue that “second language acquisition takes place through
conversational interaction”(Lightbown and Spada 43). They agree that the comprehensible
input is essential for language acquisition and claim that modified interaction is necessary
mechanism for making the input comprehensible.
2.3.2. The Applications of the Theoretical Approaches to Teaching English Conversation
I have presented miscellaneous opinions about learning and acquisition. Each theory
reflects a different conception to second language acquisition; however, they have certain
things in common. Firstly, all of them acknowledge and emphasize the importance of input in
the second language acquisition. Secondly, all theories are meant to account for the working
of the human mind. Thirdly, as Thornbury points out “each theory incorporates a stage which
roughly equates with awareness” (“How to Teach Speaking” 39). Also, all theories attempt to
explain “how this knowledge is integrated, or appropriated, into the learner‟s existing system”
and accept “that at least some of this new knowledge becomes available for use; it is
automated” (Thornbury, “How to Teach Speaking” 39). I tend to believe that some elements
from each theory and both learning and acquisition have their irreplaceable role to play in
teaching English Conversation. Therefore, the combination of them seems to me the best
solution.
There are several arguments in favor of learning. Firstly, conditions in the classroom are
special, that is to say artificial. Secondly, according to Yule, pupils are in the optimum age for
learning a second language. They are able to analyze typical features of a foreign language
27
and as it has been referred to by Harmer, learners may welcome an opportunity to think
consciously about the way the language works. Thirdly, as they have only three or four
lessons of English per week, pupils do not have enough exposure to English. Also, it should
be taken into account that there are pupils with mixed abilities in the classroom. Not all of
them are able to ´pick up´ English easily, with no real conscious effort and without overt
instructions. Furthermore, a barrier to acquisition may be created by affective factors, e.g.
unwillingness to learn English, no identification with English culture or speakers, stressful
atmosphere in the classroom, low motivation etc.
Nevertheless, there is also much to be said in favor of acquisition. Firstly, learners need to
be exposed to English as much as possible. It is suggested that “the role of the language
teacher should be to provide the right kind of language exposure, namely comprehensible
input (Harmer, “How to Teach English” 47). Lessons of English Conversation could meet this
requirement. Secondly, acquisition is associated with an anxiety-free atmosphere and high
motivation. Furthermore, when learners need to say something they “will be able to retrieve
the language they need from their acquired-language store” (Harmer, “How to Teach English”
47), which is quicker and more effective than to retrieve the learnt language. Harmer explains
that “learnt language tends to ´get in the way´ of acquired-language production and may
inhibit spontaneous communication” (“How to Teach English” 47).
Furthermore, if terminology is used, it should be used carefully with respect to learners´
age and level and “a simple generalization, even if not entirely accurate, is more helpful to
learners than a detailed…definition” (Ur 82-3).
Moreover, different types of learners should be taken into account. Some of them
remember better material they can see, others need to hear it and others prefer it to be
connected with physical movement. Therefore, visual, aural and kinesthetic inputs should be
utilized within the teaching and learning process.
To sum up, both learning and acquisition are important for teaching English Conversation
and aspects from various approaches to second language acquisition should be used. Pupils
should be exposed to English as much as possible and motivated to communicate with it.
Furthermore, they should have opportunities to use English in real-life situations and a
particular language-using environment should be created in the classroom. In addition, they
should be offered chances to study theoretical backgrounds of English Conversation and
chances to see how conversation works.
28
2.3.3. The Main Aim of Teaching English Conversation
The main aim of teaching English Conversation is that learners will develop and improve
communicative competence in English. The term communicative competence was coined by
Dell Hathaway Hymes, who objected to Chomsky‟s distinction between competence and
performance and proposed the notion of communicative competence, or knowledge necessary
to use language in social context. His model has eighteen components and is based on the
view that learners need to know not only grammar and vocabulary, but also the context in
which words are used. Communicative competence is defined by Yule as “the general ability
to use language accurately, appropriately and flexibly” (“The Study of Language” 169).
Thornbury states that speaking is a skill and “being skilful assumes having some kind of
knowledge base” (“How to Teach Speaking” 11). He categorizes knowledge as extralinguistic
knowledge, such as background knowledge of topic and culture, and linguistic knowledge,
which includes genre knowledge, discourse knowledge, pragmatic knowledge, grammar,
vocabulary and phonology. Yule summarizes this knowledge as grammatical, sociolinguistic
and strategic competence. Grammatical competence is described as “the accurate use of words
and structures” (Yule, “The Study of Language” 169). It is taught and learnt during customary
lessons of English and therefore, it should occur only partially during lessons of English
Conversation. The second component of communicative competence is sociolinguistic
competence, which means the ability to use language appropriate to the social and cultural
context. It is connected with pragmatics (e.g. meanings as communicated by speakers, the
interpretation of speakers´ intended meaning in a particular context, the organization of what
speakers want to say or the fact that more is communicated that actually said). Strategic
competence is “the ability to organize a message effectively and to compensate, via strategies,
for any difficulties” (Yule, “The Study of Language” 169). Both sociolinguistic and strategic
competence should be the main focus of teaching English Conversation.
2.3.4. Different Methods
A number of different theories, approaches and suggestions have been proposed to help
learners become successful and effective in learning English. Practical activities, a lively
debate about learning and acquisition and both arguments for and against various methods and
approaches have resulted in teaching English as we know it today. Different approaches to
29
teaching English reflect different theoretical view on the way it might be taught and learnt
best.
Grammar rules and word lists are presented in the Grammar-Translational method and then
learners try to use them in various exercises. One of the greatest disadvantages of this method
is its ignorance of language functions, mainly in conversation.
As far as the Audio-Lingual method is concerned, the main focus is on drills. This method
is based on the belief that “the fluent use of a language is essentially a set of habits that can be
developed with a lot of practice” (Yule, “The Study of Language” 165).
A PPP sequence embraces elements from methods mentioned above. In Presentation,
Practice and Production lessons, “the teacher presents the context and situation for the
language and both explains and demonstrates the meaning and form of the new language”
(Harmer, “How to Teach English” 50). Then learners practice and produce the new language.
This method is widely used for teaching grammar, pronunciation, functions of a language etc.;
however, it is based on learning rather than acquisition.
Communicative Language Teaching focuses on “students communicating real messages,
and not just grammatically controlled language” (Harmer, “How to Teach English” 50) or, in
other words, on “a belief that the function of language should be emphasized rather than the
forms of the language” (Yule, “The Study of Language” 166). It is based on a belief that
learners should learn how to perform different language functions by using various language
exponents (e.g. different ways of inviting, agreeing, suggesting etc.) and be aware of the need
for appropriacy in terms of the kind of language they use (e.g. informal, formal, polite,
tentative etc.).
The emphasis is on the task itself rather than on the language used in the Task-Based
Learning. When the task is completed, learners check, analyze, correct and study the language
they used.
2.3.5. Engage, Study and Activate Elements
It is essential for English teachers to familiarize themselves with various approaches and
methods to take a sensible decision on what method or combination of methods will suit best
both their needs, preferences and teaching aims and needs and learning preferences of their
learners. I identify myself with teachers and experts who recognize “the value of language
exposure through comprehensible input, while still believing that most people find chances to
concentrate on language forms and how they can be used extremely helpful” (Harmer, “How
30
to Teach English” 51). In other words, it is not necessary to adopt a certain approach or
method as a whole. The best idea is to choose and combine the best elements from various
methods and approaches. Nevertheless, there is a potential threat or risk of the lack of
philosophy or coherence of the teaching practice. To avoid this risk, Harmer suggests using
lessons or teaching sequences that have certain characteristics and structure in common. They
should consist of Engage, Study and Activate elements.
Engage means that learners´ curiosity, interest, passion and involvement are aroused. Then
learners are engaged, pay attention and remember more. Suitable activities are games, music,
pictures, making predictions, using material related to learners´ life etc.
Study activities “focus on the construction of something, whether it is the language itself,
the ways in which it is used or how it sounds or looks” (Harmer, “How to Teach English” 52).
There is a seemingly endless variety of activities that can be used here, e.g. explanation,
reading a text, listening activities, practice of a new structure, various types of exercises etc.
The Study element may include elements similar to PPP procedure; however, it is more
complex. Both inductive and deductive approaches may be used. A deductive approach “starts
with the presentation of a rule and it is followed by examples” (Thornbury, “How to Teach
Grammar” 29), which is similar to PPP procedure. An inductive approach asks “students to do
all the intellectual work, rather than leaving it to the teacher” (Harmer, “How to Teach
English” 52). An inductive approach starts with examples and learners try to discover and
figure out the rules. These activities focus mainly on the accuracy.
Activate element includes activities designed to “get students using language as freely and
communicatively as they can” (Harmer, “How to Teach English” 53). The main focus is on
fluency and the main objective of these activities is to “use all and any language which may
be appropriate for a given situation or topic” (Harmer, “How to Teach English” 53). Students
use the language to talk about themselves, they are encouraged to make dialogues, debates or
role-plays, comprehend different texts or read and listen for pleasure, write essays, stories and
poems etc.
2.3.6. Pre-communicative and Communicative Activities
Authors dealing with teaching conversation describe, name, rate and subdivide
communicative activities differently; however, the underlying principle is the same. Activities
are always graded from simple to complex and from more teacher-directed to most
autonomous. Learners´ abilities to communicate effectively are developed gradually by means
31
of various types of practice activities. Ur defines practice activities as “the rehearsal of certain
behaviors with the objective of consolidating learning and improving performance” (19).
They should allow learners “to acquire an intuitive, automatized knowledge which will enable
ready and fluent comprehension and self-expression” (Ur 19).
Littlewood distinguishes pre-communicative and communicative activities. The main
purpose of pre-communicative activities is “to produce certain language forms in an
acceptable way” (Littlewood 16). Learners´ attention is focused on forms to be learnt rather
than meanings to be communicated, however, some links with meanings are also developed.
They are teacher-supported and similar to drills. According to Littlewood, they “bridge the
gap between linguistic and communicative competence” (8) and learners are gradually
equipped with skills necessary for communication. These activities help learners “develop
both fluency of behavior and clarity of understanding in their use of the foreign linguistic
system” (Littlewood 8), because the linguistic forms are related not only to communicative
function, but also to nonlinguistic reality. Littlewood subdivides pre-communicative activities
into structural practice, activities relating structure to communicative function, activities
relating language to specific meanings and activities relating language to social context.
The main focus of structural practice is “exclusively on the performance of structural
operations” (Littlewood 9). It focuses on the relationship between prompt and response, e.g.
practice of the correct form of the past simple by means of a simple dialogue, where examples
are either predetermined or learners have a limited choice. Activities relating structure to
communicative function sound more communicatively authentic and serve to illustrate both
structural and communicative facts. The structures are related to the situational context, e.g.
learners make or reject suggestions, while practicing the structure like + -ing. Another step is
taken in activities relating language to specific meanings. Learners adapt the language “so
that it reflects some aspects of non-linguistic reality, such as the concrete situation, a picture
or personal knowledge” (Littlewood 11). Suitable activities are e.g. question-and-answer
activities based on visuals. Activities relating language to social context, e.g. questionnaires
and longer conversational sequences, serve as a basis for social interaction. Learners begin to
interact as equal partners in an exchange, rather than merely reacting to stimuli” (Littlewood
12).
Communicative activities provide whole-task practice, improve motivation, allow natural
learning and create a context which supports learning. Their main purpose is to communicate
meanings effectively to a partner. Learners use the linguistic repertoire they have learnt to
32
communicate specific meanings for specific purposes. Littlewood proposes to distinguish
functional communication activities and social interaction activities.
Functional communication activities emphasize the functional aspect of communication,
e.g. learners are encouraged to solve a problem or overcome an information gap “with
whatever language they have at their disposal” (Littlewood 20). They have to choose neither
language appropriate to a particular situation, nor language grammatically accurate. The main
aim is to get meanings across effectively. Social interaction activities improve learners´
ability to “take account of the social meaning as well as the functional meaning of different
language forms” (Littlewood 20). Learners are supposed not only to convey meanings
effectively, but to also pay attention to the social context in which conversation takes place.
Role-plays and simulation activities are typical examples of social interaction activities.
Thornbury agrees that “shortage of opportunities for practice is identified as an important
contributing factor to speaking failure” and recognizes the importance of “training and
practice in the skill of interactive real-time talk, with all its attendant discourse features”
(“How to Teach Speaking” 28). However, he, unlike the other authors, does not treat
conversation separately from speaking, but includes it into teaching speaking. He presents
various theories relevant to teaching speaking. All of them incorporate stages that equate with
awareness, when learners encounter new material for the first time, with practice, when “this
knowledge is integrated, or appropriated, into the learner‟s existing system” (Thornbury,
“How to Teach Speaking” 28) and with autonomy, when learners are able to use the
knowledge independently and autonomously. Consequently, Thornbury introduces
awareness-raising activities, appropriation activities and higher-level activities. He ranks
conversation among higher-level activities.
Awareness-raising activities are associated with presentation activities. Thornbury states
that awareness-raising activities involve three processes – attention, noticing and
understanding. Ur holds that in formal courses, where time and resources are limited,
“unmediated new input is often incomprehensible to learners; it does not function as ´intake´,
and therefore does not result in learning” (11). Awareness-raising activities help learners
uncover gaps in their knowledge connected with speaking as a skill. They help to activate
learners´ attention and focus it on the material learnt. Furthermore, they activate learners‟
effort and conscious learning strategies and promote further learning. They can focus on topic
shifts, communication strategies, speech acts, performance effects, language features,
sociocultural rules etc. Mainly transcripts and recordings are used as a basis for teaching here.
33
Appropriation activities, or practiced control, involve “demonstrating progressive control
of a skill where the possibility of making mistakes is ever-present, but where support is
always at hand” (Thornbury, “How to Teach Speaking” 63). The main idea is that these
activities allow learners to take over the ownership of the skill of speaking and that “gaining
control of the speaking skill involves practising that control” (Thornbury, “How to Teach
Speaking” 63), and therefore the main objective of the practice is self-regulation. Some of
appropriation activities recommended by Thornbury are drills, chants, chatting on the Internet
by exchanging short typed lines, reading aloud, placing pre-determined conversational
expressions into a dialogue, information gap activities etc.
With the increased automaticity of their language production, learners achieve a higher and
higher degree of autonomy. Higher-level activities are presentations, talks, stories, jokes,
anecdotes, drama, role-plays, discussions, simulations etc. Thornbury considers conversation
to be one of these higher-level activities and one part of the skill of speaking. He believes that
conversational competence needs to be learnt, practiced and developed gradually.
Nevertheless, Thornbury corroborates and acknowledges that “it is difficult to plan or
programme something as inherently unstructured and spontaneous as casual conversation”
(“How to Teach Speaking” 106). He suggests organizing conversational classes around a set
of themes, using talking circles or creating consciously the right conditions for conversational
exchanges. Also, he emphasizes the importance of outside-class speaking, which means that
learners should be encouraged to use speaking skills not only in the classroom, but also in the
outside world, e.g. the use of taped dialogues, computer-mediated communication, reflective
journals, portfolios, audio and video conferencing etc.
Nolasco and Arthur make a distinction between speaking and conversation skills. They
claim that skills specific to conversation that make it easier for learners to engage in on-going,
interactive and satisfying conversation do not overlap one hundred per cent with speaking
skills. They maintain that speaking skills, although partly necessary for conversation, are not
alone sufficient for learners to be able to talk to each other informally. The authors offer three
basic types of activities, a combination and balance of which provide a coherent and
purposeful approach to teaching English Conversation.
The rationale behind the Controlled activities is the fact that learners need guidance and
support from a teacher in early stages. Controlled activities “help students develop confidence
as well as the ability to participate in and maintain simple, commonly encountered
conversation “ (Nolasco and Arthur 23). The authors suggest using two main groups of
activities. One group consists of ´getting to know you´ and ´articulation´ activities. They build
34
up personal security, promote trust and create a safe and understanding environment in the
classroom. The other group is formed by activities that help develop learners´ abilities to take
part in conversation. These activities “give controlled practice in the building blocks of
conversation using dialogue building techniques such as close dialogues, by paying attention
to exchange structure and the short responses known as gambits as well as through grammar
practice” (Nolacso and Arthur 23).
Awareness activities increase learners´ sensitivity to the way conversation works. If
learners want to achieve conversational competence, they need to be aware of what native
speakers of English do in conversation. Such knowledge can be partly acquired
subconsciously as a result of comprehensible input, which means enough exposure to English,
however, this process “could be facilitated and shortened by the use of activities which
promote” (Nolasco and Arthur 51) learners´ ability to sound English, development of the
ability to interpret language used, a feeling of appropriateness, the knowledge of
conversational strategies and the awareness of English culture. Learners are encouraged to
observe, imitate, experiment, identify and discuss various aspects of conversation. Awareness
activities may also include an explanation or some characteristic features could be compared
to the features of the learners´ mother tongue.
The third type of conversational activities introduced by Nolasco and Arthur is Fluency
activities. They promote learners´ abilities to maintain and develop social relationships,
exchange information, co-operate when solving a problem and express ideas and opinions.
Nolasco and Arthur hold that Fluency activities “must provide the experience of using English
in real time…, offer learners the chance to express their own attitudes, emotions and ideas…
and provide the opportunity of using the language for a specific purpose…” (79). Also, they
should be culturally appropriate and relevant to learners´ life.
2.3.7. Feedback
Feedback as understood here means both assessment and correction. Feedback can take
different forms and it always depends on the activity, the particular learner, the type of a
mistake made, the stage of the lesson etc. As it provides learners with information on how
successful their performance has been and how to improve it; the importance of consistent
and reliable feedback has been acknowledged. Littlewood states that “the concept of success
is, however, not absolute: it is determined by the focus or purpose of an activity” (90). The
purpose may be of two kinds – either the purpose to produce certain linguistic structures or
35
the purpose to convey certain meanings. Also, both purposes may be combined in a certain
activity. Therefore, the success may be measured according to both structural and/or
communicative criteria.
Nolasco and Arthur agree that feedback is a vital ingredient of improving performance in
language learning. Areas for feedback on conversational skills should include grammar,
appropriacy of vocabulary and expressions, fluency, pronunciation and non-linguistic factors
affecting communication. The authors maintain that “feedback need to be staged and
selective” (118) and suggest to use observation sheets or record cards for each learner which
summarize how successful the learners´ performance in above mentioned areas has been.
Also, specific feedback tasks should be created after the decision on the area to be evaluated.
Furthermore, “the nature of the feedback also tells the learner what criteria for success are
operative during a particular activity, and therefore indicates what his own purpose and focus
should be” (Littlewood 90).
Generally, it is agreed that during communicative activities, when the main focus is on
fluency, teachers “should not interrupt students in mid-flow to point out a grammatical,
lexical or pronunciation error (Harmer, “The Practice of English Language Teaching” 143),
because it would destroy the conversational flow and direct students´ attention to language
forms, which means accuracy. Consequently, it is advisable for teachers to make notes during
these activities and postpone feedback until the activity has finished. Also, learners should be
encouraged to access and correct themselves or other members may be asked to help. What
more, as it is not an effective way of improving learners´ performance and it could discourage
learners, the correction of all errors and mistakes is not recommended. Moreover, it should be
done in a non-obtrusive way, e.g. in the form of reformulation of what learners have said. In
addition, teachers should avoid singling out students for particular criticism. Also, the
feedback may include a clarification of why mistakes were made and re-production of the
correct form may or may not be required.
36
2.4. Summary of Part One
To sum up, Part One provides the theoretical background and a rationale for the practical
Part Two. It focuses on linguistic and didactic information. It deals with style and
concentrates on linguistic analysis of informal face-to-face conversation. It embraces various
opinions about and approaches to teaching English and presents recommendable methods and
techniques that should be used when teaching features of informal face-to-face conversation.
All these pieces of information serve as a basis for the practical Part Two.
37
3. Part Two
3.1. Introduction to the Practical Part
I started teaching the optional subject English Conversation two years ago. As it had not
been taught before, I was supposed to think of and create a new syllabus for this subject. I
tried to base it on requirements for English language education that are set out in the
Framework Educational Programme for Basic Education and the Common European
Framework of Reference for Language. Pupils at a primary school should achieve the A2
level. According to the CEFR, pupils at the A2 level can:
understand sentences and frequently used expressions related to areas of most
immediate relevance (e.g. very basic personal and family information, shopping, local
geography, employment). They can communicate in simple and routine tasks requiring
a simple and direct exchange of information on familiar and routine matters. They can
describe in simple terms aspects of his/her background, immediate environment and
matters in areas of immediate need“(“Common European Framework of Reference for
Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment”)
I organized classes of English Conversation around a set of themes, e.g. daily routine, family,
my town or city, sports, shopping, travelling, food and drink etc. Nevertheless, very soon I
realized that I teach speaking rather than conversation, which I found unsatisfactory. Speaking
skills do not overlap a hundred per cent with skills specific to conversation. Speaking skills
are necessary, but not alone sufficient, for conversation. Conversation is “any interactive
spoken exchange between two or more people”(Pridham 3). It “exists within a social context
which determines the purpose of the conversation and shapes its structure”(Pridham 1). There
are three factors that seem to be central in conversation – the inexplicitness of a language,
normal non-fluency and randomness of subject-matter and a general lack of planning.
Speaking, mainly as taught in schools, is considerably less interactive (often only one
participant is involved), more fluent and explicit, planned, often prepared in advance and
topics are pre-determined. Speaking activities range from presentations, monologues,
prepared speeches, story-telling, recounting plots of films, books or plays to questionnaires,
problem solving, describing pictures, role-plays etc. Nevertheless, to be able to engage in
conversation, learners´ knowledge has to be stretched far beyond speaking. Learners need to
38
know for example when to talk, how to gain a turn, how to structure a conversation, how to
cooperate with other participants, what conversational behaviour, language or topics are
acceptable etc. Consequently, I have started searching for new ways of teaching English
Conversation. I have found inspiration in Thornbury‟s book How to Teach Speaking, Nolasco
and Arthur‟s book Conversation and Littlewood´s book Communicative Language Teaching.
Although Thornbury, unlike Nolasco and Arthur and Littlewood, includes conversation into
speaking, all three authors insist on the need to teach conversational skills and offer a series of
tasks developed for learners of English to improve these skills. These sources of information
have helped me develop and design appropriate materials for teaching English Conversation. I
have not rejected the initial format of the course; I have modified and improved it. I have been
using a set of themes; however, I have enhanced it with teaching sequences that focus on the
development of pupils´ abilities to take part in conversation. The practical Part Two consists
of such teaching sequences.
The practical activities are based on information, methods and techniques described in the
theoretical part of the thesis. They are designed in a way that is suitable for pupils at lower
secondary. They follow recommendable principles that Harmer suggests to use when teaching
English, which means that they include the three elements of a successful teaching sequence –
Engage, Study and Activate. Furthermore, they are graded from simple to complex and
inspired by Thornbury‟s, Nolasco and Arthur‟s and Littlewood´s series of conversational
activities. There are always three teaching sequences for every single feature of informal talk
that I have called Awareness, Controlled Activities and Fluency Activities. All the sequences
consist of Procedure and Comments.
As I try to base the thesis on my teaching experience, I describe here only those activities
that I have used. Also, I have decided to get some feedback on the teaching sequences from
learners. Therefore, I have created a chart with a column for each pupil, where pupils will
indicate whether they liked or did not like individual teaching sequences (see Appendix 1).
They will use these symbols: (It was great. I found it interesting, useful and amusing), (It
was OK. I have learnt new things that I might need) and (I didn‟t like it. It was boring or
difficult and I don‟t find it useful). The teaching sequences are accompanied by worksheets
for learners that I have created myself.
The teaching sequences were taught to pupils in the optional subject English Conversation.
The subject is offered to pupils in the lower secondary, which means to pupils from the 6th
to
9th
grades. The last school year, there were only 8th
and 9th
graders, however, this year the
group has changed. Pupils from the 6th
, 7th
, 8th
and 9th
grades attend the course jointly. As I
39
started teaching sequences the last year and this year the group of learners changed, I taught
some sequences twice. The Comments summarize observation from both groups.
40
3.2. Introductory Teaching Sequence
Aims: To provide a framework for the whole series
To arouse learners´ interest in the topic Informal Face-to-Face Conversation
To get pupils motivated for further learning
To provide learners with opportunities to see how conversation works
To familiarize pupils with basic features of informal face-to-face conversation by
Means of discovery activities
Aids: a tape recorder, the tape, worksheets, cards
Timing: two forty-five-minute sequences
Procedure
Step 1
The teacher prepares a tape recorder, the tape with a short extract of an informal face-to-
face conversation, worksheets for pupils with a transcript of the conversation (see Appendix
2) and cards with statements about features of informal talk (see Appendix 3). The
conversation I have chosen for this sequence is taken from Carter and McCarthy‟s book
Exploring Spoken English.
Step 2
The teacher introduces the topic by informing the class that today they are going to deal
with features of informal face-to-face conversation. He/she invites pupils to think of features
they expect to find out in a conversation and elicit at least some of the basic features. Then
learners are informed that they are going to listen to an informal conversation between two
old friends (men) who have not seen each other for a long time. Pupils are encouraged to
guess or predict what topics might be covered. Then the teacher sets the context of the
conversation. The two men are in a village pub garden on a hot summer‟s evening, talking
mainly about their children. Although the recording is the re-recorded version of the original
conversation and it is performed by actors, it could be a bit challenging for learners to follow
it. Nevertheless, learners are encouraged to relax, listen to it carefully and try to notice as
many features of informal face-to-face conversation as possible.
41
Step 3
The teacher plays the recording for the first time and learners listen to it. Then the teacher
invites learners to discuss features they have noticed and elicits some other features by asking
questions such as: What topics do the two men cover? Do the speakers cooperate? How is the
cooperation achieved? Are there any pauses in the conversation? Are they silent or voice-
filled? Are there any grammatical features typical of conversation? Are they used also in
writing? Have you noticed any informal words? Do the speakers repeat any words? Is their
speech fluent or does it sound interrupted? etc.
Step 4
The teacher hands out the worksheets with the transcript and acquaints learners with the
symbols used in it for them to be able to orientate themselves in the transcript. Learners are
invited to read it and ask about unknown words and phrases. Then the teacher plays the
recording for the second time and learners are asked to listen to it and read the transcript
simultaneously and notice the features that have been elicited previously and possibly some
others.
Step 5
Pupils prepare two cards – one with the word YES; the other with the word NO. They are
informed that they are going to play a game. The teacher will show cards with statements
summarizing the features of informal face-to-face conversation. If they think that the
statement is true, they will raise the YES card. If they think it is false, they will raise the NO
card. They will receive one point for each correct answer. The winner is the pupil with the
most points at the end of the game.
Step 6
Pupils are asked to perform the conversation between the two men or think of their own
conversation. The main point is to include as many features of informal face-to-face
conversation as possible.
Comments
This activity is meant to be the introduction to the series of conversational activities. It
provides a framework for the whole topic Features of Informal Face-to-Face Conversation. It
activates learners´ attention, arouses their interest and motivates them for further learning.
42
This teaching sequence was tried with two groups of learners. The Comments embraces
observation from both groups. The outcomes are more or less the same; however, the second
group consists of learners, whose level of English is lower. Consequently, they switched more
often into Czech, needed more help from the teacher and to get the discussion going was more
challenging. Fortunately, there are four pupils in the second group, who attended the subject
English Conversation the last year and, although they dominated the discussion at first, they
soon took others with them.
As it is believed that language learnt by means of discovery activities, where learners see
some examples of language to be learnt and try to work out how it is put together, is learnt
more powerfully, I have chosen an inductive approach to the presentation. Furthermore,
conversation is the most ordinarily and most frequently used variety of a language,
irrespective of the fact whether we talk about English, Czech or, for example Italian, and
therefore learners are (to some extend) familiar with it. Moreover, I tend to believe that the
inductive approach in this case utilizes pupils´ natural enthusiasm for digging out information
and solving problems themselves. And lastly, the inductive approach provides pupils with
more opportunities to speak than the deductive approach, which is highly recommendable
considering the fact that this sequence is taught pupils attending the course English
Conversation.
All three elements of a successful teaching sequence recommended by Harmer are
incorporated into this sequence. It is an example of a ´Boomerang´ procedure. According to
Harmer, the order of the three elements is EAS, as opposed to ESA. Pupils are engaged, then
asked to do a task and, after the activity has finished, they study aspects of language to be
learnt.
Firstly, the context of the conversation is set first. Secondly, the authentic conversation is
used, which is highly motivating. Thirdly, pupils are asked to make predictions. Moreover,
the material used is related to everyday life and it prepares pupils for spontaneous face-to-face
conversation outside the classroom. It is practically oriented and the main aim is to improve
learners´ abilities to be able to use English in real situations. All these factors contribute to the
learners´ engagement and involvement into the teaching process.
The Activate element is covered in Steps 2, 3 and 6. The activity is based on a discussion
and answers are elicited. When pupils try to identify and describe features of informal face-to-
face conversation, they use any and all language at their disposal. Also, they activate their
knowledge in Step 6, when they are asked to perform the conversation.
43
The Study element arises out of skills work on listening to the tape and reading the
transcript. It is covered mainly in Steps 4 and 5, when pupils notice and look for the features
of informal face-to-face conversation that have been previously discussed and when the
features are summarized in the game.
I must admit being fairly enthusiastic about the way this teaching sequence captivated the
pupils and about the way it worked. To tell the truth, I had not expected it. I had had some
misgivings about whether it would be interesting enough for pupils attending a primary
school. What more, I had been afraid of it being too challenging and demanding for them.
After all, although the activity avoids a detailed explanation of the theoretical background of
conversation, the terminology is used very carefully and it unfolds and further develops from
what pupils know or discover, it is a kind of a (simplified) linguistic analysis. Also, the
recording used is quite challenging even for more advanced learners.
I shortly introduced the topic of the sequence. Then I asked pupils whether there is only
one English or many different ´Englishes´. They immediately answered that there are many
kinds of English and named American English, British English, Australian English etc. and
even without me encouraging them to think of it further they added that there are also
different dialects, accents and slang. What more, they were able to explain the terms, e.g.
“Slang is a language of different groups of people. We, teenagers, use words and expressions
that our parents don‟t.” Then I asked them whether there is or is not a difference between
speech and writing. Their answer was that there is a difference mainly in grammar and
vocabulary – sentences are longer, no short forms and no informal or colloquial words in
writing. Also, they added (again without my hint) that there are also different types of speech
depending on the situation in which it takes place and on who we are talking to. When I
wanted them to name at least some features they expect in informal face-to-face conversation,
they named two or more people talking, sometimes only one person is talking and others are
listening, but sometimes more people talk at the same time (“my se někdy překřikujeme a
mluví nás i několik najednou” – here they used Czech, because they did not know how to say
´překřikovat se´), informal words, laugh, different topics, pleasant and relaxed atmosphere.
The recording was quite demanding for the pupils, mainly for the second group. When it
has finished, they were excited and they seemed to be overtaken by the recording. I was afraid
of it being discouraging, because they said they had understood only a little. So I started by a
question what was the most striking feature of it. They answered that it was the background
noise and the fact that the two men did not speak distinctly and audibly (the pupils used Czech
expressions here). Then I elicited other features of informal face-to-face conversation.
44
Although they thought they had not been able to understand much, the pupils knew that the
topic shifted several times. They could hear the topics music, new house, kids and a dog
(actually, the two men do not talk about a dog). Also, they were sure that the topics were not
prepared in advance and that everybody may talk about whatever he/she wants. Furthermore,
the pupils identified correctly the cooperative principle. They noticed that the two men signal
the fact they are listening and interested by the use of words such as mm, yeah, ah. They even
noticed the discourse marker you know. You know held their interest. They compared it to
their expressions “víš co”, “no však víš”, “vždyť víš”. Also, they mentioned the question tags
and questions and answers. What captivated their minds was the fact that the men use so
many pauses, hesitations (they described it as “It seems that they don‟t know what to say or
they can‟t find the right word”) and repetitions. They had expected it to be much more fluent,
because they had connected the fluency with a good command of English.
Having handed out the transcripts, I stopped the teaching sequence here. I had intended to
teach the whole sequence at one go, however, it seemed to me that the better idea would be to
allow the pupils some time to digest it and to go through the transcript at their leisure.
Therefore, they were asked to go through the transcript at home, underline the unknown
words, and possibly look them up in a dictionary, and try to notice not only features we have
mentioned previously, but also others.
The next lesson we started with vocabulary. It was necessary to explain expressions take
fits of putting stuff on, tucked up, cot, chopping and changing and bloomin´ duck. Pupils from
the second group were less prepared, so this stage took longer than with the first group.
Nevertheless, the pupils remarked that it had been much easier to read the conversation than
to listen to it and that they had not had any difficulty understanding it. Also, they came up
with other features of informal face-to-face conversation i.e. false starts, vague and colloquial
expressions (sort of, thing, stuff or something) that they know from watching films and
listening to songs, voiced pauses (erm). Furthermore, I directed their attention to the discourse
markers well and I mean. The second listening was then much easier for them and pupils from
the first group also managed to succeed in the game that summarizes the main features.
Consequently, I certified all of them winners, which made them happy. Pupils from the
second group misunderstood some statements, e.g. statement number 3. They mostly raised
the NO cards, because they remembered that also overlapping and simultaneous speech
occurs. Also, they did not understand some expressions from the statements, i.e. interactive
spoken exchange, participate, vague language and discourse markers, so I had to adapt the
statements slightly (e.g. take part instead of participate) and, although we had mentioned the
45
term discourse markers previously and there are examples of discourse markers in the
statement, I had to explain it to some pupils in Czech.
When they were asked to perform the conversation, it did not work. As they read it, it
sounded unnatural. I would say that that the main reason was that they had listened to the
original conversation only twice, which was not enough for them. Furthermore, to learn it by
heart might have been a better idea and it would have, probably, sounded more natural,
however, it would be quite time-consuming. As the main aim of the sequence was to acquaint
pupils with the basic features of informal face-to-face conversation and they would have other
opportunities to practice various kinds of conversation, I found neither repeated listening, nor
learning the conversation by heart, useful at this stage. Therefore, I asked them to prepare a
very short conversation on their own and include at least some features we had discussed
previously. It worked much better. Mainly, they used voiced pauses, colloquial words and
phrases (e.g. Wow, you‟re kidding), discourse markers (mainly you know and well), laugh,
false starts and repetition. Most they liked the fact that their conversation really should look
like fragmented, so they ´lived it up´ and exaggerated it a bit. Also, they used abbreviations in
their conversation. They use them in Czech, not only in writing, but also in speech. They
asked me whether English teenagers use them in conversation. I had to admit not being sure
about it. I informed them that abbreviations (e.g. omg – Oh, my God, lol – laughing out loud,
rofl – rolling on the floor laughing, btw – by the way etc.) are used in e-mails; text messages
etc., but that I had heard that they are also used by teenagers in conversation, mainly in
American English. I promised them that I would try to find out it.
To sum up, I am inclined to believe that this teaching sequence has fulfilled its purpose.
Pupils were interested in it, they were motivated and the participation was even. At the end of
the sequence I asked them to indicate into the grid their evaluation of the sequence. Their
answers confirmed my opinion that the sequence was very successful.
I nearly did not use terminology, because, with regard to pupils´ age and level, I do not
find it necessary, useful or essential. I used only a few specialized words in the statements and
yet they were obstructive for some pupils. Therefore, I have decided to alter the statements
next time and use even less specialized words. I avoided a detailed explanation and rather
tried to guide pupils by means of questions and hints. Also, I provided them with additional
information and specified their answers. What more, I deliberately used a simplified version
of a transcript and accompanied the handouts with pictures, which is more suitable and
motivating for pupils. Furthermore, pupils were given opportunities to speak as much as
possible. As far as Czech is concerned, it was used only occasionally by the pupils from the
46
first group when minor problems with vocabulary occurred or when pupils wanted to compare
some expressions with their Czech equivalents. Pupils from the second group switched into
Czech more often and also needed some expressions to be explained in Czech. I tend to
believe that the main reason is the lower level of their English. They used any and all of the
language at their command to achieve the main aim of this teaching sequence, which is to
realize that informal face-to-face conversation is characterized by the occurrence of certain
features and to find out what these features are.
47
3.3. Cooperative Principle
3.3.1. Awareness
Aims: To revise basic features of informal face-to-face conversation
To increase learners´ sensitivity to the way conversation works
To introduce the cooperative principle
To develop awareness of the cooperative principle
To familiarize pupils with the basic principles of a successful conversation (Gricean
maxims)
Aids: worksheets
Timing: 55 minutes
Procedure
Step 1
The teacher prepares worksheets for pupils (see Appendices 4 and 5). The conversation 1
(Appendix 5) is taken from Yule‟s book Pragmatics.
Step 2
The teacher introduces the topic of this teaching sequence, which is the basic principles on
which communication among people depends. As a warm-up, pupils are asked to think of and
say aloud, one by one, one word that they associate with the phrase ´informal face-to-face
conversation´. Then it starts again with the phrase ´informal face-to-face conversation´, but
this time pupils are expected to say one word that they associate with the word that their
classmate said.
Then the main features of informal face-to-face conversation that were dealt with in the
preceding lesson are revised. The teacher writes the phrase informal face-to-face conversation
on the board and pupils are invited to write the features they can remember around it. They
create a word map similar to this one:
48
Step 3
After the warm-up, pupils are asked to form groups of four and they are given the first
worksheet (see Appendix 4).
The teacher introduces the first activity. He/she asks learners whether somebody has taught
them how to speak to other people or whether they have learnt it on their own, naturally. Then
the teacher asks them who comments the way they speak. After this introduction, learners are
asked to read the short paragraph on the top of the worksheet and, if necessary, ask about the
unknown words. Then they are invited to read the rest of the worksheet on their own and tick
those items that are true for them. Then they are encouraged to compare their answers with
others in their group, discuss them and possibly add some other parents´ advice and teachers´
comments. The teacher monitors the groups and helps when needed.
Step 4
When the activity has finished, the teacher tries to elicit the basic principles of a successful
conversation by asking questions based on the preceding activity, e.g. Should you say
something you don‟t believe to be true? Should you offer others enough information? Should
you say too much or too little? Should you speak clearly? Should your comments be logical?
Should you speak to the point? etc. The basic principles are summarized.
INFORMAL FACE-TO-FACE CONVERSATION
colloquial words
false starts
turn-taking
discourse markers
pauses
not prepared
contracted forms
simpler grammar
not fluent
cooperation
simultaneous speech
repetition
different topics
49
Step 5
The teacher hands out the worksheets with the short conversations (see Appendix 5).
He/she indicates that people involved in the conversations do not follow the basic principles,
on which a successful conversation should be based. Pupils are asked to read the
conversations in groups and try to find out why the conversations are not considered to be
successful; why people involved in them are not satisfied. In other words, what rules,
mentioned previously, the people violate. The teacher monitors the groups and helps the
discussion in groups going.
Step 6
The task is checked and the rules that are violated are briefly summarized with the whole
class. The groups are invited to choose one conversation and act it out.
Step 7
Pupils are asked to think of a conversation, during which they did not feel good, and to try
to find out what was the reason. Was it the fact that the other person violated the rules of
conversation? Which one? And secondly, pupils are asked to think of the conversation, when
it was them who violated some rules. Do you sometimes talk to your parents in the same way
as the boy does in the conversation 2? Pupils are asked to think of it at home and prepare it for
the next lesson.
Comments
The main objective of this teaching sequence is to improve learners´ abilities to take part in
conversation by increasing their sensitivity to the way conversation works. It is aimed at
developing awareness of a cooperative principle that can be elaborated in four sub-principles
called ´Gricean maxims´. It is meant to help pupils realize not only that a conversation can
proceed smoothly only when participants cooperate and follow the four maxims, but also that
participants expect their conversational partners to obey these rules and that when the maxims
are broken, a conversation may fail.
All three ESA elements are present. The Engage element is covered when the context is set
and the topic introduced. Also, pupils are actively involved from the very beginning. The
warm-up makes them invest mental effort and prepares them for the next steps. Furthermore,
this sequence embraces elements of personalization and is based on pupils´ experience, which
50
is highly motivating for pupils. In addition, worksheets for learners are accompanied by
pictures.
The Study element is covered in Steps 2, 3, 4 and 5. It is based on discovery activities. The
teacher does not explain; he/she rather directs pupils to draw the right conclusions themselves.
The teacher prompts learners to make cognitive effort as they uncover the basic principles of
conversation. It unfolds and issues from learners´ own experience and answers are elicited.
The teacher provides learners with additional information, specifies their conclusions and
summarizes the main points.
This sequence is based on a group work, which maximises pupils´ participation. Pupils are
focused on the task and use language as communicatively as they can. The Activate element is
covered also in Steps 6, when pupils perform one of the conversations.
This sequence provides learners with the theoretical background of conversation.
However, the main emphasis is not on talking about conversation, but rather on learning by
doing. The use of terminology is avoided.
The warm-up was very entertaining for pupils. In the first part, they mentioned e.g.
communication, word, face, friends, different topics, home, fight etc. In the second part, the
activity started with the phrase informal face-to-face conversation and ended with the word
orange, which pupils found very funny.
When the features of informal face-to-face conversation were revised, pupils could
remember different topics, pauses, repetition, turn-taking, false starts, colloquial words and
simultaneous speech. As I had wanted them to have the main features summarized and at their
disposal also at home, I had prepared copies of the word map from Step 2 in advance. I gave
them the copies and asked them to describe the features they had not mentioned previously.
They had difficulty only with the term discourse markers. They could remember the
expressions You know, well, by the way etc., but they forgot that they are called discourse
markers.
When I asked them who comments the way they speak most often, they mentioned their
parents, teachers and friends. I invited them to think of some advice they have received from
them. They came up with e.g. Don‟t be rude. Look at me when you speak to me. Be quiet
(Pupils used the phrase Shut up!). Don‟t say ´what´. You should say ´please´ and ´thank you´.
Say ´hallo´. etc. Then I asked one pupil to read the short introduction from the worksheet for
all the pupils and made myself sure all pupils understand it. Pupils did the task
enthusiastically. Most they liked the new colloquial phrases, especially Says you and It has
neither rhyme nor reason. Also, they appreciated the explanatory notes at the bottom of the
51
worksheet. Learners of the 8th
and 9th
grades from the last year group had no difficulty joining
in the discussion. All of them participated in the discussion actively. The second group of
learners that consists of 6th
, 7th
, 8th
and 9th
graders needed more help from me. Firstly, I
divided them into the groups so that there were some higher-level and some lower-level
pupils in each group. In this way, the better pupils could help the weaker ones and helped the
discussion going. Secondly, I encouraged all pupils to join in the discussion, kept reminding
them to use English and not to revert to Czech when they faced some difficulty expressing
themselves and offered help all the time.
When we summarized the basic principles that people are expected to follow, if a
conversation is to be satisfactory for both participants, pupils correctly identified the maxim
of quality (We should tell the truth) and the maxim of relation (People should speak to the
point). However, pupils mentioned not only the linguistic principles, but also basic principles
associated with acceptable or desirable behaviour during a conversation, e.g. We should be
polite. We shouldn‟t interrupt others. We should look others in the eye. We should use certain
word e.g. please or thank you and shouldn‟t use others e.g. what?, which was all right,
because it should have been based on the advice from the worksheet. Other two principles
were elicited from the pupils by asking the questions such as: Do people expect that they
receive enough information? Should you say too much or too little? Should you speak
clearly? Should what you say be logical? etc. The principles were then written on the board
and served as a basis for the next part of the teaching sequence.
Pupils were amused by the short conversations. Most they liked the second one. They
remarked that they experience such a situation very often. They were also very enthusiastic
about the phrase You drive me mad. The participation in the subsequent discussion was even. I
monitored the groups and helped the discussion going by asking additional questions such as
Does the woman give the man enough information? Does she lie? Is the conversation
satisfactory for the man? etc.
When pupils were invited to act out one of the conversations, three groups out of four
chose the second one. Their short scenes were entertaining and pupils enjoyed themselves.
To sum up, I tend to believe that this teaching sequence has come up to both my and my
pupils´ expectations. It has confirmed my belief that even pupils at a primary school are not
only able to deal with the theoretical background of conversation, but can also benefit from it,
provided that the content and methods are adapted to the pupils´ age and level. My opinion is
confirmed by the pupils´ evaluation of this sequence. All of them drew a smiling smiley.
52
3.3.2. Controlled Activity
Aims: To revise the cooperative principle
To consolidate learners´ knowledge of the cooperative principle
To introduce the hedges
To provide learners with opportunities for effective practice of the cooperative
principle and with chances to use their knowledge in a real-life conversation
To improve learners´ conversation skills by means of real-life activities
Aids: worksheets
Timing: 45 minutes
Procedure
Step 1
The teacher prepares worksheets for pupils (see Appendices 6 and 7). The activity in Step
3 is inspired by Nolasco and Arthur‟s activity Dialogue fill-in from their book Conversation.
The teacher starts this teaching sequence with the learners´ own experience with
unsuccessful conversations (Step 7 from the preceding teaching sequence). Pupils are asked to
perform the conversations in pairs. Others are invited to comment on the conversations. What
was wrong with it? Who didn‟t find it satisfactory? Why? In this way, basic principles of
conversation are revised and learners are prepared for the following sequence.
Step 2
Pupils make pairs again. They are given the first worksheets (see Appendix 6). The teacher
introduces the activity: John is a young British student who meets an attractive foreign student
(Jane) at school. Read the conversation and try to discuss in pairs the following questions:
1. Is Jane interested in meeting John? How do you know?
2. Is he interested in meeting her? How do you know?
3. Is John likely to loose interest in Jane?
4. What‟s wrong with the conversation?
5. Is it satisfactory for John?
6. Does Jane follow the basic principles of conversation?
Pupils do the task in pairs and the teacher monitors the pairs and helps when necessary. The
task is checked with the whole class. Then learners are asked to do the second part of the task,
which is to think of and create their own versions of the conversation so that it is satisfactory
53
for both John and Jane. It should be clear that not only John is interested in Jane, but also that
Jane is interested in John. Then the pairs read the new versions of the conversation.
Step 3
The teacher sets the context of this teaching sequence by the short introduction: People
have to cooperate and trust each other during a conversation for it to be successful. They
expect that what others say is true. Also, they expect that they will receive enough
information; not too much, not too little. Also, they expect that others will speak to the point
and will stick to the topic. And also they expect that others will say everything clearly and
logically and that it will make sense. These are the basic principles that people should follow
when speaking to each other. However, sometimes, it is not possible to follow these
principles. For such cases, there are certain phrases that can be used to show that people know
these rules, but it is not possible for them to follow them now. Today, we are going to learn
some of these expressions.
Step 4
The teacher hands out the second worksheet to learners. He/she informs learners that there
is a list of expressions that can be used during a conversation when a speaker knows that
he/she is not accurate, clear, sure etc. Learners are encouraged to match these expressions
with the four principles of conversation. Learners are asked to do the task in pairs. Apart from
the task, there is also the short introduction for the learners to be able to revise the principles
at home (see Appendix 6). Learners´ task is to match the hedges with the four ´Gricean
maxims´, however, the instructions on the worksheets avoid the use of terminology.
Step 5
After the task is checked with the whole class, learners are asked to try to add at least some
of the expressions into the new versions of the conversation from the first handout. They are
invited to prepare the conversation as a role-play. The task is checked with the whole class –
pupils perform their new versions of the conversation.
Comments
This teaching sequence is meant to be a type of controlled practice. It provides learners
with opportunities for effective practice, through which their skills and knowledge are further
54
consolidated and mastered. Controlled practice activities serve as a bridge between awareness
and fluency activities. Learners are provided with a cue or a set pattern, directed to use it and
invited to compose their own conversations. What vocabulary they use is up to them.
This sequence is a type of a boomerang procedure EAS(A). Pupils get interested in the
topic in Step 1. The activity is based on pupils´ own experience; the conversations are related
to their own lives. Also, their curiosity is aroused. Moreover, the Engage element is included
in Step 3, when the teacher sets the context of this sequence.
The Activate element is covered in Step 1, when learners perform their own unsuccessful
conversations. Furthermore, they use language as freely as possible in Step 2, when they
discuss questions based on the original dialogue and when they create and perform their own
versions of John and Jane‟s conversation. The Activate element is included also in Step 5,
when learners role-play the final versions of the conversation.
The Study element is embraced in Steps 3 and 4. The ´Gricean maxims´ are revised and
hedges introduced.
I must admit that the second part of this sequence was much less successful than the first
part. The first part (Steps 1, 2 and 3) proceeded smoothly. Pupils were engaged in the activity,
when they performed their own unsuccessful conversations. They wondered what their
classmates had prepared and what their conversations would be about. They decided in the
pairs, whose conversation was more interesting and performed it. They faced no difficulty in
recognizing which principle was violated. Mostly, they prepared conversations, where one of
the participants said too little. Only one pair performed a conversation, in which a maxim of
manner was violated. The boy was examined in literature, but he was not prepared and did not
know much. He tried to avoid receiving mark 5. His answers were obscure, ambiguous and,
definitely, not to the point. Others enjoyed this conversation very much.
Learners identified the principle that was violated in John and Jane‟s conversation easily.
Their new versions of the conversation were very creative and funny.
I had expected that the task in the second worksheet would be an easy and quick activity,
which appeared to be a false assumption. It was difficult for learners and its form was boring
for them. The main problem was that pupils did not understand the underlying principle of the
use of hedges. I tried to explain it more clearly. Nevertheless, as I felt it did not work, I
switched into Czech and explained the whole matter one more time in Czech. I compared the
expressions with their Czech equivalents and provided learners with examples, e.g. Imagine
the situation when you come to my office and ask: “Where is Mrs. Urubková, please?” I think
that she is in 7B, but don‟t know it for 100%, so I say: “I‟m not sure, but I think she‟s in
55
7B.”etc. Then we divided the expressions into the four groups together. Furthermore, pupils
did not feel like including the hedges into their versions of John and Jane‟s conversations. I
did not urge them to and we skipped Step 5. We finished this sequence with a short discussion
(in Czech) about this activity. Pupils found the expressions useful, but the activity itself
difficult, boring and lengthy. Also, they found it superfluous to include the hedges into the
conversation.
To sum up, now, when I can see it retrospectively, I think that I should not have tried to
deal with the cooperative principle so comprehensively. I am inclined to believe that teaching
the hedges this way was redundant and too abstract for pupils. I have not adhered to the basic
rule – ´with respect to learners´ age and level´. This issue is quite abstract and difficult to
understand even for more advanced learners. Now I find it neither necessary, nor important to
know for pupils attending a primary school. I tend to believe that it would be sufficient, for
example, to prepare a conversation, where some of the hedges are included and alert pupils to
them.
56
3.3.3. Fluency Activity
Aims: To further consolidate learners´ knowledge of the cooperative principle
To summarize and revise the cooperative principle
To give learners practice in a pattern of interaction that is as close as possible to
what native speakers do in real life
To provide learners with opportunities to use what they have learnt previously as
freely as possible in an informal face-to-face conversation
Aids: a poem, cards with secret messages, sheets of paper
Timing: 45 minutes
Procedure
Step 1
The teacher prepares a poem and ´secret messages´ for learners in advance (see Appendix
8). He/she informs learners that today it will be a very creative lesson. They will compose a
poem and draw a lot of pictures.
Step 2
Pupils form groups of four. The teacher asks them whether they can remember the four
words that summarize the basic principles that people expect to be followed during a
conversation. These words (true, brief, relevant and clear) are written on the board. Each
group chooses one of the words written on the board and pupils are asked to think of as many
words that rhyme with it as possible. The teacher introduces the activity: I have tried to
compose a poem about the cooperative principle, but I haven‟t been able to finish it. Could
you help me, please? This is what I have written so far:
Would you like to talk to others?
Learn that there are rules and patterns.
You should follow certain rules,
for others not to be confused.
Do you find them easy, honey?
Principles are even funny.
We have them in fingertips
and recite them with a smile on our lips.
57
Others have to trust your words,
without it, it would be worse.
Then pupils are encouraged to add two (or more) lines to the poem. The teacher writes the
beginning of the poem that he/she has begun to compose on the board. When pupils finish the
poem with their lines, the poem can be read aloud.
Step 3
Each pupil is given a blank sheet of paper. The teacher invites them to draw a picture.
They can draw whatever they want, but others must not see what it is. When the pictures are
drawn, learners are given another three blank sheets of paper. Then they form the groups
again and the teacher sets the task. Their task is to draw the same pictures as their classmates
in the group did, so at the end of the activity all of them should have four similar pictures.
They will take turns. Three of them will ask questions to find out what the fourth pupil‟s
picture looks like and will draw the picture in compliance with his/her answers. The pupil
who will describe his/her picture will receive ´a secret message´ from the teacher (see
Appendix 8).
The first pupil receives this message: Don‟t tell them the truth! Lie! They mustn‟t find out
what your picture looks like. Don‟t describe your picture. Describe an imaginary one.
The second pupil receives this message: Don‟t tell them everything. Your motto is: The
less, the better. Use as few words as possible and give them as little information as possible.
The best answers are for example yes, no, mm, green, big etc.
The third pupil receives this message: Don‟t speak to the point. Talk about whatever you
want, but not about your picture. Make fun of your classmates. When they ask, for example,
Did you draw a house?, answer them, for example, I know that you can draw a house or I
would like to have a big house.
The fourth pupil receives this message: Don‟t speak clearly! Make it difficult for others to
find out what your picture looks like. Use expressions such as maybe, sort of, something like
that, who knows?, it’s difficult to say etc.
Step 4
When the activity has finished, pupils compare their pictures with the original picture. The
activity is summarized with the whole class. The teacher asks pupils questions based on the
activity, e.g. How did you feel? Did you receive the information you needed? Why not? Did
58
your classmates follow the basic principles of conversation? Did you expect them to follow
the principles? Would it be possible to communicate with others, if they didn‟t follow the
principles? Are the principles important?
Comments
This teaching sequence is a type of a fluency activity. It provides learners with
opportunities to use what they have learnt previously as freely as possible. The main aim of
this sequence is to summarize and revise the cooperative principle in a playful way. The main
emphasis is on the Activate element; however, all three ESA elements are included.
The teacher motivates pupils by informing them that it will be a very creative lesson. They
are engaged from the very beginning. The Study element appears only partially in Step 4,
when the ´Gricean maxims´ are summarized. The main focus is on the Activate element. It
appears in Steps 2 and 3.
This teaching sequence was very creative and amusing. Pupils worked enthusiastically and
enjoyed it. The poem summarizes the main points of the cooperative principle in a playful
way. Pupils added these lines:
You are a shrew,
what I say is true.
Rules say ´be clear´,
and therefore YOU buy the beer.
One principle is ´be brief´
and I like beef.
I don‟t know the word ´relevant´,
but my favourite animal is ´elephant´.
They were allowed to form groups according to their preferences and wishes. Also, they could
use dictionaries; however, only one group needed and used the dictionary. It took them
approximately ten minutes to think of and compose their two lines. They remarked that
although they had prepared the words that rhymed with ´their´ word, it was quite challenging,
but entertaining, for them to compose the lines. Nevertheless, one group that consisted of four
9th
graders composed not only the two lines, but also three other alternatives: True isn‟t
always right,
people sometimes have to lie.
You have to say truth,
or you will become a shrew.
59
You must say the truth
or people will be confused.
The group that struggled with the task most was the other group of 9th
graders. They
composed the lines connected with the principle ´be brief´. They could not think of anything
for the first five minutes and seemed uninvolved. What more, they used Czech and only two
of them tried to compose the lines. They all struggle with English. The only girl that worked
in this group is always active and enthusiastic, however, as she is not very good at English,
she asks me repeatedly to either speak Czech or translate everything I say. Also, she keeps
using Czech. I have explained her that it is important for them to both hear English and try to
use it as much as possible. I have made her sure that it does not matter when she sometimes
does not pronounce properly, does not know how to express herself or makes mistakes. All of
us face such problems sometimes. The main thing is to try and do not give up. However, I
have observed that she is not ashamed. It is just easier for her to speak Czech and she needs
somebody to ´push´ her and remind her to speak English. Therefore, I encourage her to speak
English and praise her when she succeeds.
When the first pupil in the group received the secret message from the teacher, others were
very curious about the message. The first message was ´Don‟t tell the truth´. The class was
very lively, noisy and a bit of ´chaotic´ during this activity. I wanted to summarize the
´Gricean maxims´ and compare all the pictures at the end of the activity and thought that the
groups would work simultaneously. However, it was unworkable and illusory. When pupils
drew their first pictures, they immediately wanted to see the original and it was obvious to
everyone what the message was about. All of them saw the joke immediately. They laughed
and shouted that the pupil lied. They were eager to know the next message. When pupils
described the pictures, they used English nearly all the time. Czech was used only
occasionally. Before the activity started, I asked them to form some examples of the
questions, so even the weaker pupils were able to ask simple questions such as Is there an
animal? Has it got four legs? What colour is it? etc. Of course, nobody succeeded in the task
to draw the same picture as his/her classmates, which was the main point of the activity. In
this way, they naturally and practically satisfied themselves of the importance of the
cooperative principle. They saw for themselves that if the four basic principles of
conversation are violated, the main purpose of conversation cannot be fulfilled.
To sum up, I tend to believe that this teaching sequence was very successful and that it
served its purpose.
60
3.4. Turn-taking
3.4.1. Awareness
Aims: To arouse learners´ interest in the topic Turn-taking by audio/visual means
To get pupils orientated to the topic Turn-taking
To introduce the topic Turn-taking
To prepare pupils for following, more independent sequences
To sensitize learners to the way the turn-taking is being used in conversation
Aids: an episode from a popular series, worksheets
Timing: 70 minutes
Procedure
Step 1
The teacher prepares an episode from a popular series and worksheets for learners. I have
chosen an episode from the series The Big Bang Theory. It is called The Barbarian
Sublimation. One worksheet includes tasks with puzzles about the topic of the teaching
sequence and about basic information about turn-taking (see Appendix 9). The other
worksheet includes questions about turn-taking and the transcript of a conversation from the
episode. (see Appendix 10).
Step 2
The teacher motivates learners by informing them that today they are going to solve some
puzzles and watch an episode from the popular series The Big Bang Theory.
Step 3
The teacher tells learners that it is up to them to find out the main topic of today‟s lesson.
How to do that? It is easy. The only thing they have to do is to solve the first riddle. They are
given the first worksheet and asked to do the task 1. This task is inspired by exercise 4, page
9, from the workbook of the course book Project 2.They read the joke, follow the instructions,
do the task and puzzle out the topic – turn-taking. Then they are asked to explain what turn-
taking means.
61
Step 4
The teacher informs learners that he/she has prepared a short introduction to the topic turn-
taking, but something strange happened. Probably, a printer‟s gremlin has made merry in the
computer and deleted all vowels a and e from the introduction. Could they supply the missing
letters into the text, so that we can read it? Learners do the task 2 in the worksheet and the
introduction is read aloud: Conversation is an activity in which two or more people take turns
at speaking. Typically, only one person speaks at a time and others wait until he/she indicates
the end of his/her turn. When more people try to speak at the same time, it is called
simultaneous or overlapping speech.
Step 5
Learners are informed that they are going to watch the opening section of the episode The
Barbarian Sublimation from the series The Big Bang Theory. There are five main characters –
four young physicists and computer geeks Sheldon, Leonard, Howard and Raj and one young
woman, Sheldon and Leonard‟s neighbour Penny. She is a waitress, but wants to become an
actress. In this episode, she becomes addicted on a computer game. Sheldon and Penny have a
conversation at the beginning of the episode. Learners are asked to concentrate on the way
they take turns in them. When it has finished, the teacher tries to elicit at least some basic
facts about turn-taking.
Learners are given the worksheet (see Appendix 10). They are asked to answer the
questions 1 and 2 in pairs. The task is checked with the whole class. Then learners are invited
to read the question 3 and perform the ways that can be used to indicate that a speaker wants
to take a turn while the other person is speaking. Then the rest of the episode is played
through. The main characters make a lot of conversations. Learners are encouraged to notice
and concentrate on ways they take turns in it.
Step 6
The opening section of the episode is played one more time and learners are invited to read
Sheldon and Penny‟s conversation at the same time. They are informed that there is one
example of simultaneous speech in the conversation. They are asked to underline the parts of
Sheldon and Penny‟s speech that they say simultaneously. Then learners read the conversation
in pairs. The teacher monitors the class and helps when necessary. Then learners act the
Sheldon and Penny‟s conversation. The transcript of the conversation is included in the
worksheet (see Appendix 10).
62
Comments
Native speakers know naturally who is to speak, when and for how long. However,
Nolasco and Arthur hold that “this skill is not automatically transferred to a foreign language”
(9). It is difficult for pupils to get into a conversation, to recognize when to start a turn and
when to give it up to others. Therefore, they should be trained in these areas. This teaching
sequence brings these matters to pupils´ attention.
All three ESA elements are included. Pupils are motivated and engaged from the very
beginning, because they have to find out the topic and the introduction themselves. Solving
puzzles and riddles is amusing and interesting for them. Also, watching the episode is highly
motivating to them. Furthermore, the worksheets are accompanied by pictures. The pictures
are eye-catching and arouse learners´ interest.
The Study element is included in Steps 3, 4 and 5. The basic facts of turn-taking are
studied by means of activities that take advantage of learners´ natural curiosity and partiality
for solving riddles. What more, the activities avoid extended explanation and terminology is
used carefully. In addition, the Study element is based on the episode from the series The Big
Bang Theory, which makes it even more accessible and appropriate for learners.
The Activate element appears in Steps 5 and 6. Step 5 includes watching a video for
pleasure and performing the ways that can be used to indicate that a speaker wants to take a
turn while the other participant is talking. Step 6 embraces acting the conversation from the
episode. I have chosen the episode The Barbarian Sublimation, because it is based on Penny‟s
addiction to a computer game. As pupils play computer games very often, this topic is highly
interesting for them. In addition, this series is on Prima Cool nowadays and is very popular
among pupils. It is dubbed on Prima Cool, so I thought it would be interesting for pupils to
hear it in English. I accompanied the episode by Czech subtitles for the purpose of this
activity.
Pupils solved the first puzzle easily and they were able to explain what turn-taking means:
“People change when speaking. One speaks, then the other.” The second puzzle was solved
easily, too. Only some pupils faced difficulty pronouncing the terms simultaneous and
overlapping properly.
Learners were eager to watch the episode The Barbarian Sublimation. Some of them have
seen episodes from the first series on Prima Cool, so they ´whetted the others´ appetite´ for
watching this episode even more. When the opening section has finished, I stopped the video
and tried to elicit at least some basic facts about turn-taking. I asked questions, e.g. How do
Sheldon and Penny finish their turns? Learners recognized and noticed that a person can
63
finish a turn by asking a question. Also, they mentioned that a turn is completed “when people
say the whole sentence”. I was really enthusiastic about these their two observations. I asked
them to think of it further and try to find out what follows after ´the whole sentence´.
However, they were not able to figure out the fact that there is a pause. After this short
discussion I asked them to answer the two questions from the worksheet in pairs. Some of the
pupils were a bit impatient, because they wanted to watch the rest of the episode. I made them
sure that the task would take only a couple of minutes and then we would watch the episode
again. They discussed the questions in pairs and I monitored them. The pupils with a higher
level of performance in English discussed the questions using English all the time and the task
was very easy for them. The weaker pupils needed me to help them and encourage them to
use English. The question 3 was very entertaining. I asked them to imagine themselves in the
situation when somebody is talking and they want to indicate that they have something to say
by making short sounds (but nothing else). They started making sound mmm, aaa, eee etc.,
which made them laugh and they remarked that they sound like monkeys. Then they tried to
use facial expressions and body shifts and at the end everything together. They enjoyed this
task very much.
The episode was played through and then we watched the Sheldon and Penny‟s
conversation one more time. Pupils had acquainted themselves with the conversation (they
had been asked to read it through) and they were informed that they would act it out in pairs.
They were asked to listen to the conversation and read it at the same time and concentrate on
pronunciation. Also, they should have underlined the sentences that Sheldon and Penny say
simultaneously. Then they prepared the conversation in pairs. Some of them were really great
at it. They acted it enthusiastically and they did not even need my help. It was enough for
them to watch and hear it twice to be able to pronounce all the words properly and perform it
with ease. However, there are also pupils, whose English is on a considerably lower level. The
vocabulary used in the conversation was too difficult for them.
I would like to mention one significant problem here. I am going to summarize all my
observations and conclusions in the final part of the thesis, however, I find it necessary to
foreshadow and mention this problem now, when I have taught this group the first five
teaching sequences.
As I have mentioned in the introduction to the practical part, this year I started teaching a
group that consists of pupils from the 6th
, 7th
, 8th
and 9th
grades, so it is a largely
heterogeneous group. Learners do not only attend different grades, and therefore their
language knowledge is different, but there are also marked differences in the level of
64
performance in English among pupils from the same grade. Consequently, there are both
pupils great and pupils considerably worse at English. It causes various teaching and learning
problems. Firstly, I am not always able to activate them all. The better, more autonomous and
more confident ones respond actively to the activities and tend to dominate the lessons. They
would even succeed in more challenging and demanding tasks. They are always interested,
well prepared, motivated and therefore able to do the tasks independently and with ease. They
have no difficulty following me when I speak English and they try to use English as much as
possible. They switch into Czech only occasionally. I would like to emphasize that this ´sub-
group´ consists of pupils from all grades, not only of the most advanced 9th
graders. There are
four 9th
graders, two 8th
graders and four 7th
graders. Although the 7th
graders are, as far as
learning English is concerned, two years behind the 9th
graders, they have no difficulty coping
with the tasks. They try to use all and any language at their disposal. They ask actively about
unknown vocabulary, make notes into the worksheets and are motivated and willing to learn
something new. They are never discouraged or disinterested.
The other six pupils in the group struggle with English. There are four 9th
graders, one 8th
grader and one 6th
grader in this ´sub-group´. The tasks are usually difficult for them, they
keep using Czech, expect me to talk Czech as much as possible and sometimes get bored and
uninterested. As this ´sub-group´ is quite numerous – six pupils out of sixteen and as I believe
strongly that all pupils attending this optional subject should benefit from it, I do my best to
help and motivate these weaker pupils. I have discussed with them their reasons for attending
this subject and asked them about their expectations. Furthermore, I have explained them
what and why I am going to teach. I balance the content of the conversational lessons with
respect to the weaker pupils´ needs. On the other hand, I have to take into account also the
needs and expectations of pupils that are really good at English and would be able to cope
with more challenging tasks. Therefore, I have to plan and think of the activities very
carefully. Sometimes I get learners to work cooperatively and peer-teach, so that the better
ones can help the weaker ones. Also, I vary the groups and pairs. I try to make activities
entertaining, amusing and interesting. Furthermore, the activities are practically oriented.
Nevertheless, I tend to believe that these activities suit best pupils who are more proficient
and confident in English.
65
3.4.2. Controlled Activity
Aims: To build and develop pupils´ abilities to participate in and maintain a conversation
To increase learners´ sensitivity to turn-taking
To develop pupils´ ability to interpret what is being said
To give learners controlled practice in the building blocks of conversation
Aids: stripes of paper with parts of exchanges, a set of cards, cue dialogues
Timing: 40 minutes
Procedure
Step 1
The teacher prepares examples of exchanges and writes one part of the exchange on a
stripe of paper for each pupil in the class (see Appendix 11), a set of cue cards for each pupil
(see Appendix 12) and a cue dialogue for each learner (see Appendix 13).
The teacher introduces this teaching sequence by informing learners that today they are
going to deal with turn-taking. They will make a lot of dialogues.
The fundamental rules of turn-taking are revised by eliciting them from learners. The
teacher asks questions based on the preceding teaching sequence, when learners have
familiarized themselves with turn-taking, e.g. How many speakers usually speak at once?
Should long silence between turns be avoided? How can you indicate that you are listening
when the other speaker is speaking? Do we use any facial expressions or body language to
indicate that we want to take a turn? etc.
Step 2
The teacher gives each pupil half an exchange on a stripe of paper and asks them to
memorize it (see Appendix 11). Pupils are invited to circulate freely and say aloud only words
from their stripe. Their task is to listen to others and find a partner who has a part of an
exchange that fits to their part. Pupils who have found their partner move to one side of the
room. When all pupils have their partners, the task is checked – pupils read the exchanges.
The activity is summarized and learners´ attention is drawn to the adjacency pairs. The
teacher asks e.g. How do you know that your parts fit together? When you ask a question, do
you expect that your partner will answer it? If you greet somebody, what do you expect he/she
will say? etc. Pupils are guided to the conclusion that certain pairs of utterances usually occur
66
together and that also this is one part of turn-taking. This activity is inspired by Nolasco and
Arthur‟s activity Split exchanges.
Step 3
Pupils are asked to make pairs. Each pupil is given one part of conversation. Each part has
a series of options (see Appendix 12). Pupils are instructed to listen to what their partner says
and choose an appropriate response from their card. Pupils are invited to read the options and
the teacher makes sure they understand them. Then they do the task. They practise the final
version of the conversation and are asked to focus on its performance. They are encouraged to
signal the fact they are listening and the fact that they want to take a turn (raise or lower their
eyebrows, nod or shake their heads, raise or lower their shoulders, voice-filled pauses –
mmm, hmm, stand up straighter, visibly take a deep breath etc.) This activity is inspired by
Nolasco and Arthur‟s activity Do you come here very often?.
Step 4
The teacher gives each pupil a part of a cue dialogue (see Appendix 13). Pupils make pairs
and try to make dialogues according to the pattern. Learners are again encouraged to include
as many features of turn-taking as possible so that the dialogues sound natural. They learn
their versions of the dialogue by heart and perform it. This activity is inspired by Littlewood´s
idea of a cued-dialogue and Thornbury´s idea of a flow-diagram conversation.
Comments
This teaching sequence is a type of a controlled practice. The activities are controlled in
that the choice of vocabulary and structures can be very restricted although the level of
response draws on learners´ understanding of the language used. Furthermore, these activities
are graded from very much guided, where learners have no choice; the vocabulary and
structures are predetermined (activity 1), through less guided, where learners have a very
limited choice (activity 2), to the least guided, where learners have some choices (activity 3).
The use of cues and prompts to build up dialogues is a very popular and favoured
technique in teaching conversation. One of the reasons is the fact that they can be used for all
learners - from beginners to quite advanced ones and they can range from highly controlled to
free ones. What more, these activities help learners develop both confidence and ability to
participate in and maintain a conversation. Also, learners´ independence is gradually
developed by means of such activities. Pupils are allowed an opportunity to practise the
67
building blocks of conversation, pay attention to the structure of exchange and familiarize
themselves with turn-taking in a practical, safe and entertaining way.
All three ESA elements are included. The Engage element occurs in the introduction,
when learners are motivated by the fact that they will make a lot of dialogues. Also, the
worksheets are accompanied by pictures, which is very motivating for pupils. The Study
element is included in Step 1, when the basic rules of turn-taking are revised and in Step 2,
when pupils´ attention is directed to the adjacency pairs. The Activate element appears in all
Steps in this teaching sequence. Pupils revise what they have learnt previously and use it in
practical activities.
As I have mentioned previously, the main problem in this group is the pupils´ overall
proficiency; their level of English. The less proficient ones sometimes do not understand
when only English is used and, consequently, they are lost, unmotivated and not able to
participate in activities fully. They need my help; I have to work with them individually and
even then I cannot avoid using Czech. Therefore, I have decided to use both English and
Czech when some more abstract issues are dealt with and when vocabulary used is totally new
and challenging for pupils. I am aware of possible drawbacks of using Czech during the
lessons of English conversation. Nevertheless, English is used more than Czech. Secondly,
pupils at a primary school should be trained step by step to work in English all the time.
Thirdly, as Nolasco and Arthur state “an unqualified ´English only´ rule could be
counterproductive if the students end up feeling frustrated” (81). Taking everything into
account, I find the occasional translation or additional explanation in Czech justifiable,
sensible and effective.
Pupils remembered a lot about turn-taking from the previous teaching sequence. They
participated actively when we revised the main features of turn-taking. They also did the first
activity enthusiastically. They had no problems finding their partners. Only two pupils did not
find their partners – one with the part of an exchange How’s she feeling?; the other with I’ve
lost my keys. There was nobody else without a partner, but they were sure their halves do not
match. When we checked the task, it was clear why this situation happened. Their ´expected´
partners formed a pair, which was not illogical. Their new exchange was: What’s up? No
idea., which also makes sense. Pupils were able to answer my question that focused on the
adjacency pairs. I did not use the term ´adjacency pairs´; I described them as pairs of
sentences that belong together. Pupils found the adjacency pairs straightforward and logical.
They remarked that they use them ´without thinking´ and automatically.
68
I was a bit doubtful about the second activity. I did it last year with ninth graders during a
customary lesson of English and pupils were confused. I had to explain it several times and
even then it did not work as I had expected and wanted. So this time, I was better prepared. I
explained it carefully and clearly. I explained it in English and asked one of the ninth graders
to explain it one more time in Czech. This time, it worked much better. This group had no
difficulty coping with the task. Most pairs chose this option:
Are you Peter‟s friend?
No, I‟m here with my friends.
Are those the people you‟re with?
Yes, it‟s my girlfriend Jane. Do you know her?
No, but I‟d love to meet her.
Well, come on in and join us…
Before we started the third activity, we practised different ways of making suggestions.
One more time the ninth graders were very active and presented several ways of making
suggestions, e.g. Let‟s go to the cinema. We could go to the cinema. Do you fancy going to
the cinema? Shall we go to the cinema? Would you like to go to the cinema?. They wrote all
the examples on the board for others. Then I asked pupils to write on the board ways of
accepting or rejecting a suggestion. They wrote there e.g. That‟s a good idea. I‟d love to. Yes,
why not. I‟d rather go … I am afraid, I can‟t. Then it was easy for all the pairs to do the task. I
asked them to learn their versions by heart. It sounds more natural, when they perform
dialogues they learnt by heart than when they just read them. They included a lot of features
of turn-taking.
This teaching sequence was successful and the participation was even.
69
3.4.3. Fluency Activity
Aims: To further consolidate learners´ knowledge of turn-taking
To motivate pupils to speak as freely and independently as possible
To summarize and revise the main features of turn-taking
To give pupils practice they need to be able to use English communicatively
To encourage a greater degree of interactivity in learner-learner talk
To improve learners´ conversation skills
Aids: a poster, figures of two people, speech bubbles, worksheets
Timing: 50 minutes
Procedure
Step 1
The teacher prepares an empty poster and pictures with two men and speech bubbles (see
Appendix 16). Also, he/she prepares worksheets for learners, one with an example of a
dialogue that includes conversational features which encourage a greater degree of
interactivity in learner-learner talk (see Appendix 14) and the other with pictures of figures
that summarize features of turn-taking (see Appendix 15).
The teacher informs learners that today they are going to finish the topic turn-taking. They
will revise and summarize the main features of turn-taking and use them in practical activities.
There are used and adapted elements from Thornbury´s activities Dialogue building and
Conversational tennis in this teaching sequence.
Step 2
Learners are given the first worksheet (see Appendix 14). Two pupils are asked to read the
dialogue. The teacher hints learners that there are three features included in the dialogue that
contribute to the development of a conversation. He/she tries to elicit them. He/she asks e.g.
Does the man provide only one piece of information for the question asked? Does the man
show interest in his partner‟s answer? How? Is it helpful to return a question with another
question? etc. Once these features have been elicited and highlighted, they are written on the
board: 1. provide two pieces of information for every one question asked
2. respond to answers with a show of interest e.g. Really? Wow! Do/did/were/are you?
3. return a question with another question
70
The teacher sets learners a task of having a similar conversation in which they try to follow
these rules as much as possible. Two learners are chosen to perform it in front of the class.
Step 3
The teacher hands out the second worksheets (see Appendix 15). Learners are invited to
choose a figure they like most and read what it tells about turn-taking. The main features of
turn-taking are summarized and revised this way.
Step 4
The teacher fixes an empty poster on the board and prepares the pictures with the two men
and speech bubbles. He/she sticks the first picture on the poster. He/she elicits the situation
based on the visual clues in the picture, e.g. Who are the men? Do they know each other?
Where are they? What are they talking about? etc. Having established a context and purpose
of the conversation, the teacher tries to elicit, line by line, the whole conversation. When the
first line is completed, learners are invited to write the exchange into the speech bubbles.
Then a new picture is added to the poster. It continues until the complete dialogue has been
built up. Finally, pupils are invited to practise the conversation in pairs. They are asked to
include as many features of turn-taking as possible so that the conversation sounds natural.
Also, they are encouraged to make any changes or improvements of the original version of the
conversation, if they want. Then pupils perform the conversation in front of the class.
Comments
This teaching sequence extends and summarizes the topic turn-taking. It encourages a
greater degree of interactivity in learner-learner talk and prepares learners for real-life
language use.
All three elements of a successful teaching sequence are incorporated. As stimulating
pictures are used and materials are related to pupils´ lives, pupils are emotionally engaged and
involved. Learners focus on the construction of turn-taking in Steps 2 and 4. They study the
features that contribute to the development of a conversation. Also, they summarize and
revise the main features of turn-taking in Step 3. The main focus is on the Activate element.
The activities are designed to get pupils using language freely and communicatively as they
can. Pupils focus on the message they are trying to convey and on the task that needs to be
performed in Step 2, when they perform their own versions of the conversation and in Step 4,
where they build up the two men‟s conversation.
71
When I elicited the features that contribute to the development of a conversation, pupils
correctly identified that at least two pieces of information should be provided for each
question asked and that it is helpful to return a question with another question. Furthermore,
they mentioned expressions that show interest in a partner‟s answer, e.g. Wow. You must be
joking. Really? Sounds interesting. However, only the ninth graders were familiar with the
strategy of using a pronoun and an auxiliary verb that refer to the subject and verb of the
preceding statement to encourage more information. Therefore, I explained this issue to the
rest of the class. The only problem with this activity was that the two sixth graders who attend
this course had not studied the past simple. They understood the underlying principle (I
explained the strategy also on examples of the present simple, present continuous, verb to be
etc.), but they did not understand the dialogue, where the past simple was used. I asked them
to work together in a pair, helped them translate the dialogue, explained very briefly the basic
rules of the past simple and recommended them to make their own version of the dialogue in
the present simple. Sometimes I work with these sixth graders individually, at other times I
ask the more advanced pupils to help them.
Pupils liked the figures very much. We not only read what the figures say about turn-
taking, but we also translated it, because learners asked me to. They told me that they found
this summary very helpful.
Pupils enjoyed the third activity very much and they were all very active. They came up
with this situation: The men meet in the park. They know each other, but haven‟t seen each
other for some time. Their names are Tim and Mark. Mark is very sad, because he has lost his
dog Chilanhacha. Pupils laughed a lot, because nobody could remember the dog‟s name. The
boy who devised the name wrote the name on the board. They neither needed nor wanted my
help. They wanted to work independently as a group. Therefore, I did not interfere and just
observed them working. Some of them switched into Czech quite often, especially when they
had a funny or interesting idea how to build up the dialogue further, but were not able to
express themselves in English. Others encouraged him/her to say it in Czech and a pupil who
knew how to say it in English translated it. They cooperated greatly and everybody was
involved, so I did not insist on using English all the time. I tend to believe that this was one of
the situations where the ´only English´ rule would be counterproductive and would do more
harm than good.
72
3.5. Discourse Markers
3.5.1. Awareness
Aims: To introduce the topic Discourse Markers
To provide learners with the opportunity of paying attention to and conscious
registering of the occurrence of discourse markers in an authentic conversation
To increase learners´ awareness of discourse markers
To make pupils aware of what native speakers do in conversation
Aids: a transcript of an authentic conversation, worksheets
Timing: 45 minutes
Procedure
Step 1
The teacher prepares the transcript of a conversation where discourse markers appear
frequently. I have used the transcript from the first teaching sequence Two old friends meet up
again. I have altered it; added some discourse markers, changed some lines and made it
shorter (see Appendix 17). I decided to use this conversation, because pupils had had an
opportunity to listen to it previously, and therefore had been familiar with it. Also, the teacher
prepares a worksheet for learners with the basic functions of the discourse markers (see
Appendix 18).
Step 2
The teacher introduces the topic of this teaching sequence: Today we are going to deal
with discourse markers. Discourse markers are words or phrases that themselves do not have
any meaning, but do have a very important role in conversation. They help us organize what
we want to say and they also help our partners understand what is being said. They can open,
close or continue a topic, help us move from topic to topic, indicate whether speakers share
the same view of what is being talked about and contribute to the cooperation between
speakers. There are lots of them, for example well. Do you know any other discourse
markers? Can you name them? The teacher elicits discourse markers. Learners write them
down on the board.
73
Step 3
The teacher hands out the worksheets to learners. He/she establishes the topic and the
context of the conversation. He/she asks learners whether they can remember who talks to
whom, about what and why, where they meet etc. Also, the teacher checks that the learners
are clear about the relationship between the men and that the conversation is informal. Then
learners are asked to read the transcript silently and given the opportunity to ask about any
residual doubts or problems with vocabulary they have about the conversation.
Step 4
When learners are sufficiently familiar with the text, the teacher asks them to concentrate
on the discourse markers used in the text. They are encouraged to read the conversation one
more time and underline all the discourse markers they can notice. The task is checked in
pairs and then with the whole class. The teacher asks learners to comment on what effect the
discourse markers have. He/she tries to elicit at least some basic functions or characteristics of
the discourse markers, e.g. Are the discourse markers addressed to the listener? Does the
listener answer to them? Does the speaker expect the response? Concentrate on the discourse
marker well. Is it used at the beginning of what we want to say? Does its use ´buy´ us some
time to think of what we want to say? etc.
Step 5
Pupils are given the second worksheet. They do the task; they join the discourse markers
with their functions. The task is checked with the whole class and the functions of the
discourse markers are discussed and explained in more details.
Step 6
Pupils are encouraged to prepare the conversation from the first worksheet in pairs. More
advanced learners can be asked to prepare their own version of a similar conversation and
include as many discourse markers as possible.
Comments
This teaching sequence is a type of awareness-raising activity. Learners are made aware of
some discourse markers and their usage and functions in an informal face-to-face
conversation. It provides learners with the opportunity of paying attention to the new
structures, with the opportunity of the conscious registering of their occurrence in a real-life
74
conversation and with the opportunity of understanding their functions and usage. These goals
are achieved by means of studying the transcript of an authentic conversation, where several
instances of discourse markers are included.
The teaching sequence embraces the ESA elements. Pupils are involved, when the content
and context of the conversation are discussed. Furthermore, the authentic conversation is
used, which encourages engagement. Moreover, worksheets are accompanied by pictures.
Pupils are given the opportunity to study the discourse markers in Steps 2, 4 and 5. They
focus on the ways the discourse markers are used. The Study element is based on the
discovery activities, where pupils are asked to do at least some parts of the intellectual work,
rather than leaving it only on the teacher. They activate their acquired knowledge in Step 6,
when they practise the conversation or create their own similar versions of it.
When I introduced the topic and asked pupils to name some other discourse markers, first
of all they mentioned you know. They could remember it from our first session dealing with
informal face-to-face conversation and they know it from films and various series. They
compared it to their Czech expression ´víš co´. They use it very often in Czech and it is true
that some of them even try to use it in English, at least occasionally. Furthermore, one of the
ninth graders mentioned by the way and anyway. She explained that they are similar in
meaning and provided others with the translation ´mimochodem´. Moreover, one of the boys,
also the ninth grader, came up with so. However, nobody was able to name any other
discourse markers. Therefore, I proceeded to Steps 2 and 3. I asked learners to read the
transcript and underline the discourse markers that we had mentioned previously and try to
find any others. I have to admit being pleasantly surprised, because they identified and
underlined all the discourse markers in the transcript. We discussed them briefly. Pupils
compared them with their Czech equivalents. They translated you see as ´chápeš´. They use it
in Czech in a similar way as you know. The ninth graders were familiar with the discourse
marker I mean. They translated it as ´myslím tím´ and ´jakože´.
Having in mind the activity with hedges that did not work, I made the task with matching
the discourse markers to their functions comprehensible and accessible to pupils at a primary
school by using the same colour for a particular discourse marker and for the box with its
functions. Furthermore, to make it more interesting and amusing, I ´tangled up´ the
connecting lines. Consequently, it was easy for all the pupils to fulfil the task successfully.
The ninth graders understood nearly everything; they faced some difficulty only with the box
that belongs to the discourse marker I mean. Nevertheless, other pupils found the vocabulary
75
more challenging than the ninth graders. Therefore, we read the boxes together and translated
them.
I allowed pupils to make pairs according to their choice for the last activity – practising the
original conversation or creating a similar version of it. Only three pairs decided to create
their own versions of the conversation. Others practised the original version. The sixth graders
worked together. They needed my help mainly with pronunciation.
At the end of the teaching sequence, pupils expressed their satisfaction with my choice of
the topic. They told me that they are going to use the discourse markers in their speech as
much as possible, which delighted me.
76
3.5.2. Controlled Activity
Aims: To focus learners´ attention to previously introduced discourse markers
To provide learners with opportunities to practise the use of discourse markers
To increase learners´ fluency store
To consolidate learners´ knowledge and conversation skills
Aids: worksheets, a poster, sheets of paper
Timing: 35 minutes
Procedure
Step 1
The teacher prepares a dialogue in advance that incorporates examples of discourse
markers. He/she prepares a poster with two figures and writes the dialogue into speech
bubbles, so that he/she can display the poster on the board (see Appendix 19). Activities used
in this teaching sequence are inspired by Thornbury´s activities Disappearing Sentences
described in his book Grammar and Paper Conversation described in his book How to Teach
Speaking.
Step 2
The teacher introduces the topic of this teaching sequence and discourse markers are
shortly revised. The teacher elicits the discourse markers, their functions and position in
utterances from pupils.
Step 3
The teacher sets a context first by introducing the two figures as friends talking about
fashion. The teacher invites pupils to guess or think of questions and answers that they might
expect in the dialogue.
Having established the context, the teacher displays the poster or writes the dialogue on the
board. Learners are asked to read the dialogue aloud and practise it in pairs. Then the teacher
gradually erases words or sentences from the dialogue. Individual pupils are invited to read
the dialogue, including the words the teacher has erased. It continues until the whole dialogue
has been erased. When pupils know the dialogue by heart, the teacher can ask two of them to
perform it in front of the class.
77
Step 4
Pupils are given a blank sheet of paper and invited to have a conversation with their
classmates, but instead of speaking, they write the conversation on a shared sheet of paper.
They are encouraged to include as many discourse markers as possible. The activity is set as a
competition. A pair that uses the most discourse markers in the conversation receives mark
one. Pairs then perform their conversations in front of the whole class.
Comments
This teaching sequence focuses pupils´ attention to previously introduced features of
informal face-to-face conversation – discourse markers. Its main objective is to provide
learners with the opportunity to practise the discourse markers; help them memorize them and
gain control over their use, which increases learners´ fluency store.
Pupils are actively involved from the very beginning. The activities are playful and
entertaining. Moreover, visuals are used, which is motivating and helps pupils remember
better. Furthermore, both spoken and written forms are practised. Thornbury maintains that
“writing has a useful role to play as an initial stage in the appropriation of newly encountered
language for speaking” (How to Teach Speaking, 67). According to Thornbury, writing acts
as a way of easing the transition from learning to using and extends a range of learners´
repertoire of memorized expressions by giving them time to consciously access alternatives to
expressions they would use if they had to react immediately in speaking.
When pupils have to remember and retrieve from memory the erased expressions, they
study the proper use of the discourse markers. The Study element occurs also in Step 2, when
the discourse markers are revised. The Activate element is included in Step 4, when pupils
write the conversation on a shared sheet of paper. Furthermore, it appears in Step 3, when
learners perform the erased dialogue.
I started the teaching sequence with the brief revision of the previously introduced
discourse markers. Pupils faced no difficulty naming all the discourse markers we had dealt
with during the previous teaching sequence. They mentioned well, you know, you see, I mean,
so, anyway and by the way. Moreover, they could remember that well is used as an opener and
when we are reluctant to give a negative answer. Furthermore, they knew that you know is
used when a speaker thinks that a listener knows something, whereas you see when a speaker
thinks that a listener does not know something. Moreover, they were able to explain that
anyway is used when we want to change a topic. Nevertheless, I must admit that the ninth
graders again dominated this sequence. It was mainly them who answered my questions.
78
Some pupils found it challenging to remember the whole dialogue, but most of them
enjoyed the activity. I gave them their own copies of the dialogue and asked them to practise
it first in pairs. Meanwhile, I wrote the dialogue on the board. I erased the discourse markers
first and asked the individual learners to read the dialogue including the parts I had erased.
Later, when more sections were erased and some pupils started having problems to recall the
complete dialogue, I asked the whole class to try and recall the dialogue together. As the
dialogue is quite long, I erased only the parts that include the discourse markers.
The second activity was very successful. I set it as a competition, which motivated pupils.
They did their best to include as many discourse markers as possible into their written
conversation. The winning pair managed to include nineteen discourse markers into the
conversation. They used a very clever trick. Here is what they wrote:
WELL, do I know you?
WELL, I don‟t know, but I attend the course English conversation, YOU SEE. And you?
WELL, I am here, too.
SO, we attend the same course.
ANYWAY, do you understand the words discourse markers?
Yes, I know for example WELL, YOU KNOW, YOU SEE, I MEAN, ANYWAY and SO. I
prefer ANYWAY.
One more, please. I didn‟t understand…
WELL, ANYWAY, YOU SEE, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, SO.
However, other pupils did well, too. Here is another example of the pupils´ paper
conversation:
ANYWAY, do you know Chester Bennigton?
WELL, I know him. He‟s so beautiful, isn‟t he?
WELL, I find him very attractive, but I think that Jonathan Davis is nicer.
No. Billie Joe is nicer!
He‟s nice, YOU KNOW, but he wears make-up.
WELL, but Green Day plays better music than Korn, YOU KNOW.
ANYWAY, Green Day are like Justin Beber.
79
3.5.3. Fluency Activity
Aims: To activate pupils´ knowledge in practical activities
To provide pupils with opportunities to use English as freely and independently as
possible in an informal face-to-face conversation
To summarize the topic Discourse Markers
To ensure that pupils develop a sense of making progress
Aids: pictures, cards with discourse markers
Timing: 40 minutes
Procedure
Step 1
The teacher prepares various pictures and a set of cards with discourse markers for learners
(see Appendix 20). Also, he/she can prepare a box with cards with different topics for the first
activity. The first activity is inspired by Thornbury´s activity Chunks on cards from his book
How to teach Speaking.
The teacher introduces the topic of this teaching sequence and elicits some basic facts
about discourse markers from learners to prepare them for the following activities.
Step 2
Pupils arrange chairs into a circle, sit down and are given the sets of cards with the
discourse markers. Pupils choose a topic from the box or one of their own and start
discussion. They are encouraged to speak as much as possible and try to include all the
discourse markers into the conversation as naturally as possible as it develops. They add the
card to a discard pile each time it is used. It is set as a game. The first pupil to discard all the
cards is the winner. The teacher observers learners, helps and corrects them when necessary.
Step 3
Features of informal face-to-face conversation are summarized by elicitation them from
pupils. Pupils make pairs and are given various pictures. They are asked to make a
conversation based on the visuals and include discourse markers into their conversation as
naturally as possible. Also, they are encouraged to concentrate on and include the features of
informal face-to-face conversation that they have learnt so far. The teacher monitors the class
80
and helps when necessary. Some pairs are invited to perform the conversation in front of the
class.
Comments
This teaching sequence is an example of a fluency activity. It helps pupils improve their
ability to be able to engage in on-going, interactive and satisfying conversation and
contributes to the development of their conversational skills, and therefore it prepares them
for a real-life language use.
The teaching sequence embraces all three ESA elements. Pupils are introduced to the topic
and involved in the teaching and learning process from the very beginning. The tasks are
challenging and pupils are encouraged to take part in them independently and freely. Also,
pictures are used, which enhances pupils´ interest and engagement. The game that is used in
the first activity is also motivating. The Study element appears in Step 1, when the basic facts
about discourse markers are elicited and it can be included also in the first activity, when the
teacher helps or corrects learners if necessary. The Activate element is present in both
activities used in this teaching sequence. Pupils activate their knowledge in practical
activities. They use any language at their disposal.
We started with the elicitation of basic facts about discourse markers to prepare pupils for
the following activities. As the ninth graders usually dominate the lessons, I asked them not to
contribute to the discussion this time. I encouraged less active pupils to take part in this
introductory section. Even the pupils who are usually passive could remember a lot of facts
about discourse markers. They faced no difficulties answering my questions. They were able
to name all the discourse markers, they knew where in the utterances they should be used and
they were familiar with their functions in informal conversation.
I have asked pupils to create their own sets of cards with discourse markers. Everybody
prepared three cards with well, one card with you see, two cards with you know, two cards
with I mean and two cards with anyway. We arranged chairs into a circle and I explained the
rules of the first activity. I set it as a game. Everybody who would end the game with no
cards, was promised to receive mark one. They were invited to throw the cards to the middle
of our circle. Throwing the used cards on the floor instead of putting them orderly into the
discard pile is a nonessential detail. Nevertheless, in this case this ´nonessential detail´ meant
a huge difference. It made the game much more interesting and amusing for pupils. They
happily threw the used card on the floor and they really lived it up. Then they were invited to
choose the initial topic. They chose the topic ´box´. The ninth graders dominated the activity
81
and they were the first ones who successfully finished the game, however, also others
participated in the activity enthusiastically. Ten pupils managed to use all the cards and only
three pupils – one sixth grader and two seventh graders - ended up the game with all the ten
cards. As they did not participate in the activity, I asked them to write a short conversation,
where at least three discourse markers are used, as homework. The cards pupils used first
were the cards with well. Some of them were not satisfied with the choice of the initial topic;
however, they realized that they can use the discourse marker anyway to change the topic,
which they also did. Also, they had no problem using the discourse markers you know and you
see. They found it easy to remember that you know is used ´when we think our partner knows
something, whereas you see when we think something is new for our partner´, as they
described it. They compared it to the opposites. The only difficulty they faced during the
activity was the proper use of I mean. They placed it at the beginning of their utterances. It
was the only reason why I had to stop the activity. I elicited the proper use of this discourse
marker from the pupils. Nevertheless, some pupils went on using it incorrectly. Therefore I
stopped it again and reminded them that I mean is not used at the beginning of the utterance
and that we use it when we want to explain something previously said or when we want to put
it more precisely. Also, I provided them with examples. This time it was clear. The problem
was that pupils thought that it is used in the sense ´Myslím, že…´. This is why they put it at
the beginning.
Before we started the second activity, I asked pupils to revise briefly in pairs all features of
informal face-to-face conversation we had dealt with so far. I allowed them ´to cheat´, which
means that they did not have to retrieve it from memory, but they could have a look at the
worksheet we had used in the teaching sequence about the cooperative principle. We had
created the word map with the features. Therefore, it was a very brief, ´painless´ and effective
revision. We discussed the features very briefly. Then I encouraged pupils to make a
conversation in pairs and include not only discourse markers, but also other features of
informal talk. They were allowed to choose the topic on their own or to base it on pictures that
I had made. All of them chose to base their conversations on the pictures. I monitored the
pairs and then I asked them to perform the conversations one more time in front of the class.
Others were encouraged to evaluate their classmates´ performance. We concentrated on the
interactive features, voiced pauses, discourse markers, whether it sounded natural etc. Some
pairs succeeded better, some worse; however, the main advantage of this activity was that
pupils themselves were able to realize and evaluate what was right and what needed some
improvement.
82
It was one of the most satisfactory teaching sequences. All the pupils were very active and
they enjoyed themselves. I tend to believe that it was mainly due to the fact that the topic
discourse markers really captivated their minds.
3.6. Summary of Part Two
To sum up, the practical Part Two is based on linguistic and didactic information described
in the theoretical part of the thesis. This practical part of the thesis consists of ten teaching
sequences. They are designed in a way that is suitable and convenient for pupils at lower
secondary. They exemplify the teaching process that I find useful and recommendable for
pupils to help them find the key to independent, confident and appropriate use of features that
characterize informal face-to-face conversation. There are always three teaching sequences
for one feature of informal face-to-face conversation that are graded from simple to complex.
I have called them Awareness, Controlled Activities and Fluency Activities. All of them
embrace Engage, Study and Activate elements. Also, they are accompanied by worksheets for
learners that I have created myself. I have tried all the teaching sequences in practice and my
experience with them is described in Comments.
83
4. Conclusion
The main objective of the thesis is to devise and design a series of activities that contribute
to the development and further improvement of pupils´ communicative competence in
English. It is generally accepted that the ability to speak fluently does not follow naturally
from teaching and learning grammar, vocabulary and pronunciation. Moreover, there are
skills specific to conversation that do not overlap one hundred per cent with speaking skills.
Communicative competence is a complex matter that involves a command of certain skills
and various types of knowledge. Accordingly, communicative competence must be taught and
learnt.
In order to devise and design the series of practical activities, it is necessary to base it on
linguistic and didactic information. Consequently, Part One of the thesis foreshadows the
theoretical background of teaching English conversation. It deals with conversation from
linguistic point of view. It focuses on stylistic and pragmatic information and concentrates on
features and patterns that characterize conversation and differentiate it from other varieties of
English. Furthermore, various methods and approaches to teaching English are presented in
the theoretical part. Moreover, it concentrates on various types of communicative activities.
Part Two consists of ten teaching sequences. They exemplify the teaching process that I
find recommendable when teaching features of informal face-to-face conversation. They are
designed in a way that is suitable and appropriate for pupils at lower secondary. All of them
comprise of Harmer‟s ESA elements of a successful teaching sequence and consist of
Procedure and Comments. There are always three teaching sequences for each feature of
informal face-to-face conversation that are called Awareness, Controlled Activity and Fluency
Activity. They are developed to sharpen pupils´ awareness of features typical of informal
conversation and the mutual, interdependent and interactive nature of conversation. Also, they
give pupils the practice they need to improve the acquired knowledge and provide them with
opportunities to use English communicatively in real-life situations. I have tried to devise and
create original teaching sequences. When an activity used in the sequences was inspired by an
activity described in books stated in References, it is always indicated in Procedure. In
addition, the teaching sequences are accompanied by worksheets for learners that I have
created myself. Colours, pictures and clear arrangement are used, which is motivating for
pupils and makes it easier for them to cope with the tasks.
84
I believe that the series of activities has contributed to the development of pupils´
communicative competence and that it has fulfilled its purpose. There are several reasons for
my belief. Firstly, conversational skills have been taught rather than speaking skills.
Secondly, pupils have familiarized themselves with features of informal face-to-face
conversation gradually by easy stages and step by step not only in practical activities, but they
also have been provided with some theoretical background. However, the terminology was
used carefully and with respect to pupils´ age and level and a simple generalization, even if
not entirely accurate, was used to make the new material comprehensible to pupils. Moreover,
practical activities have always been the main focus of the teaching sequences. Thirdly, the
participation was even and the pupils have admitted being satisfied with the content of the
course. The feedback I have received from the pupils has confirmed that pupils not only have
found teaching and learning features of informal face-to-face conversation useful, but they
have also enjoyed it. The most interesting and successful teaching sequences were the first
teaching sequence, which was their first encounter with the topic, the teaching sequence
Cooperative Principle – Fluency Activity, where they created the poems and violated the four
basic principles of conversation, and the last teaching sequence Discourse Markers – Fluency
Activity, where they used discourse markers in the game. Nevertheless, there have also been
some parts of the teaching sequences that did not work as I had expected to, e.g. Cooperative
Principle -Controlled Activity. The main reason was that it was too abstract for pupils and
therefore they were not able to cope with the task. Moreover, I observed learners all the time.
I could see that they were getting better and better at the communicative activities. They have
gradually become more confident and autonomous and tried to use the features of informal
face-to-face conversation as much as possible. Consequently, their conversations have
sounded more and more natural. My experience with the teaching sequences is described in
Comments.
Although I am very positive about the teaching process exemplified on the teaching
sequences, there have also been some drawbacks. Firstly, the teaching sequences suit better
pupils who are good at English and whose level of English is higher. The main difficulty, or
problem, that I have faced was the fact that the class is largely heterogeneous. Pupils
attending this course are the 6th
, 7th
, 8th
and 9th
graders. It is obvious that the 6th
graders´
overall knowledge, skills and level of English are considerably lower than knowledge, skills
and level of English of the 9th
graders. Moreover, there are also differences among pupils
from the same grade. Consequently, the 9th
graders who are very good at English tended to
dominate the lessons. Secondly, the teaching sequences were mostly conducted in English.
85
However, it was sometimes necessary to use both English and Czech, when some problems
occurred. I strongly believe in the importance of the comprehensible input and I have tried to
use English as much as possible. Nevertheless, in some cases, the ´English-only rule´ would
have been counterproductive.
Considering the limited extent of the thesis, it was not possible to describe more than the
ten teaching sequences here. Nevertheless, the series of the ten teaching sequences would not
be sufficient for the development of pupils´ communicative competence. There are also other
features of informal face-to-face conversation worth teaching, e.g. politeness, vague language,
informal language, conversational routines or grammatical features of spoken discourse.
Consequently, I am going to further extend the series. I am going to think of and design other
teaching sequences that focus on the features of informal face-to-face conversation mentioned
above and use them in my teaching practice.
To sum up, there are many options open to English teachers for teaching English
conversation. It is always determined by the teachers´ and learners´ preferences and needs.
The teaching process that I propose to use when teaching features of informal face-to-face
conversation has proved successful to me. Therefore, I am going to stick to it even in the
future. I am going to organize classes of English Conversation around a set of themes, include
games, songs and videos and enhance it with teaching sequences that focus on the
development of pupils´ abilities to engage in on-going, interactive and mentally satisfying
conversation.
86
References
Articles
Erman, B. “Some Pragmatic Expressions in English Conversation”.
In: Tottie, G., Bäcklund, I. (eds) English in Speech and Writing: A
Symposium. Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis. Studia Anglistica Upsaliensia
60. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell International. 131-147. 1986. Print.
Stenström, A.-B. (1995) “Some remarks on comment clauses”. In: Aarts,
B., Meyer, C. F. (eds) The Verb in Contemporary English. Theory and
Description. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 290-301. Print.
Svartvik, J. (1980) “Well in conversation”. In: Greenbaum, S., Leech,
G., Svartvik, J. (eds) Studies in English Linguistics for Randolph Quirk.
London and New York: Longman. 167-177. Print.
Books
Aijmer, Karin. Conversational Routines in English: Convention and Creativity. London &
New York: Longman, 1996. Print.
Carter Ronald, and Michael McCarthy. Exploring Spoken English. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1997. Print.
Crystal, David, and Derek Davy. Investigating English Style., London: Longman, 1996. Print.
Dontcheva-Navrátilová, Olga. Grammatical Structures in English: Meaning in Context.
Brno: Masarykova universita, 2005. Print.
Harmer, Jeremy. How to Teach English. Harlow: Longman, 2007. Print.
---. The Practice of English Language Teaching. Harlow: Longman, 2007. Print.
Havránek, B. The Functional Differentiation of Standard Language. In: Vachek J. (ed.)
Pragiana. Some Basic and Less Known Aspects of the Prague Linguistic School.
Praha: Academia, 1983. Print.
Hutchinson, Tom. Project 2. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999. Print.
Jucker, Andreas. H. “The Discourse Marker Well in the History of English”.
English Language Linguistics 1(1), 435-52. 1997. Print.
Krashen, D Stephen. Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning.
University of Southern California: Pergamon Press Inc, 1981. Print.
Leech, Geofrey, Margaret Deuchar, and Robert Hoogenraad. English Grammar for Today.
London: Macmillan Press LTD, 1992. Print.
87
Leech, Geoffrey, and Jan Svartvik. A Communicative Grammar of English.
London: Longman, 2002. Print.
Leech, Geoffrey, and Michael Short. Style in Fiction. London and New York: Longman,
1981. Print.
Lightbown, Patsy, and Nina Spada. How Languages are Learned. Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 2006. Print.
Littlewood, William. Communicative Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1981. Print.
Palmer, F.R. Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981. Print.
Pridham, Francesca. The Language of Conversation. London and New York: Routledge,
2001. Print.
Thornbury, Scott. How to Teach Grammar. Harlow: Longman, 2008. Print.
---. How to Teach Speaking. Harlow: Longman, 2005. Print.
---. Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006. Print.
Ur, Penny. A Course in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991.
Print.
Vachek, Josef. Chapters from Modern English Lexicology and Stylistics. Praha: Státní
pedagogické nakladatelství. 1974. Print.
Verdonk, Peter. Stylistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002. Print.
Yule, George. The Study of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006. Print.
---. Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996. Print.
Wardhaugh, Ronald. How Conversation Works. New Castle upon Tyne: Athenaeum Press
Ltd, 1985. Print.
Internet Sources
Atabekova, Anastacia. “Stylistics of English”. 3 January 2011. <fld-
rudn.com/Lecture%201.ppt>
“Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching,
Assessment”. Council of Europe. 25 November 2008.
<http://www.coe.int/T/DG4/Portfolio/?L=E&M=/main_pages/levels.html>
“Dell Hymes”. Wikipedia. 5 January 2011.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dell_Hymes#Significance_of_his_work>
88
Evans, Markus. “Vague Language”. Linguarama International. 15 August 2010.
<http://www.linguarama.com/ps/297-4.htm>
“Functional Styles of English”. 4 January 2011. <www.scribd.com>
Pope, V. “An Alphabet of Conversational Features”. Litnotes. 2003. 14 August 2010.
<http://www.litnotes.co.uk/conversation.htm>
Theses
Dontcheva-Navrátilová, Olga. “Style Markers of Diplomatic Discourse: Text Analysis of
UNESCO Resolutions.“ Diss. Masaryk University, 2004. Web.
89
Appendix
90
Appendix 1
A chart for pupils´ evaluation of the teaching sequences
It was great. I found it interesting, useful and amusing. It was OK. I have learnt new things that I might need.
I didn‟t like it. It was boring or difficult and I don‟t find it useful.
1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20
91
Appendix 2
Two old friends meet up again
1. <S 1> Are you still playing er
2. <S 2> Guitar
3. <S 1> Irish music, yeah
4. <S 2> No I don‟t play very much now, no, not at all
5. <S 1> I thought you were touring the country at one point
6. <S 2> [laughs] No, I er … we go, we listen to it quite a lot, every time we go to Ireland we
7. erm, you know, seek out good musicians and er do quite a lot of listening and of
8. course we still buy a lot of records, bought a lot of records over the last few years,
9. but erm, there‟s not actually anybody to play with around here, you know [<S 1>
10. mm] there‟s a there‟s a session every Sunday night in Cambridge in a pub and
11. that‟s erm about it… do you still listen to Scottish music?
12. <S 1>Ver… since this pair have arrived [<S 2> mm] very very little, cos you just don‟t
13. have the time, and with the new house, and with the garden [<S 2> Mm]
14. occasionally I take fits of putting stuff on, not as much as before
15. <S 2>They do I s´pose take a lot of time, don‟t they, kids?
16. <S 1>They take up a lot of, I mean, normally, you get, if you‟re lucky they‟re all tucked
17. up in bed by eight-thirty [<S 2> mm] – that‟s if you‟re lucky, and then er
18. <S 2>Do they sleep all night without erm waking up, did they wake up last night,
19. they didn‟t [<S 1> no] did they, no, [<S 1> no] didn‟t hear a thing
20. <S 1>Jamie normally, you put him in his cot and he‟s gone [<S 2> mm] he sleeps he‟s
22. very good at sleeping [<S 2> mm] Thomas is a bit of a pain [<S 2> ah] all sort
23. of things frighten him, you know [<S 2> yeah] wakes up with nightmares and that
24. [<S 2> does he] yeah some nights we change beds about three or four times, he
25. comes into our bed and there‟s not enough room and so I go into his bed and he
26. comes back in so to my bed and his bed and chopping and changing
27. <S 2>It‟s extraordinary to think they have bad dreams, well, I suppose they dream of
28. images they‟ve seen during the day, probably dream of that bloomin´ duck or
29. something
30. <S 1>Or it just might be a car, noisy car going past the window or something, wakes
31. them up
32. <S 2>Mm… it´s going to be hot tonight… in bed, isn´t it
33. <S 1>Mm
92
Appendix 3
Statements for the Game (Teaching Sequence 1)
1. Conversation is any interactive spoken exchange between two or more
people.
2. People take turns during a conversation.
3. Only one person talks at a time.
4. People have a lot of time to plan and prepare what they want to say
during a conversation.
5. The topic of a conversation is known before the conversation starts
and it does not change.
6. Fluency is one of the typical features of conversation.
7. Any kind of language, for example colloquial words, very formal
language, slang etc., may occur in informal face-to-face conversation.
8. Anybody may participate in conversation.
9. Both voiceless and voiced pauses occur in conversation.
10. Everything is said clearly, exactly and openly in a conversation, so
vague language, for example thing, sort of, stuff, does not occur.
11. Native speakers of English use discourse markers (well, you know,
I mean, you see) very often during a conversation.
12. Speakers should not indicate that they are listening and interested.
13. False starts and repetitions are typical of informal face-to-face
conversation.
14. Sentences are simpler in conversation than in writing.
15. Contracted forms should not be used in conversation.
93
Appendix 4
The cooperative principle
Conversation is a social activity, which means that 2 or more people are
involved in it. When people want to communicate successfully, they have to
cooperate. The cooperation also means that certain rules are obeyed during
an informal face-to-face conversation. Children learn how to take part in
conversation mostly intuitively. However, all parents give their children
advice on what they should or should not do while speaking to others.
1. Do your parents give you any of these pieces of advice?
a) Don’t interrupt me3.
b) Don’t lie!
c) Don’t speak to me like this!
d) Reply to me!
e) Don’t say ´What? ´
f) Don’t use foul language4.
g) Says you!5
h) Don’t talk too much.
i) What is the magic word?
2. Do your teachers say it?
a) Speak when you’re spoken to.
b) Try to explain it clearly.
c) It’s off the point6.
d) Speak to the point7.
e) It has neither rhyme nor reason8.
f) Keep a civil tongue in your head!9
3 Neskákej mi do řeči. 4 Nemluv sprostě. 5 Nevymýšlej si! 6 To nesouvisí s tématem hovoru. 7 Mluv k věci. 8 Nemá to hlavu ani patu. 9 Mluv slušně.
94
Appendix 5
What’s wrong with these short conversations?
1. Man: Does your dog bite?
Woman: No. (The man reaches down to pet the dog. The dog bites
the man’s hand.)
Man: Ouch! Hey! You said your dog doesn’t bite!
Woman: He doesn’t. But that’s not my dog.
2. Mum: What did you do at school?
Son: Nothing.
Mum: What about the maths test?
Son: Fine.
Mum: What does it mean ´fine´? Have you passed it?
Son: Sort of…
Mum: What did you have for lunch?
Son: Don’t know.
Mum: You don’t remember what you have just eaten???
Son: No.
Mum: You drive me mad…10
3. Student 1: Do you have your maths homework?
Student 2: No. The equations11 were very difficult.
Later in the classroom:
Teacher: Who has solved the equations?
Student 2: Me. They were easy.
4. Friend 1: Do you have the new computer game? It’s fantastic,
isn’t it?
Friend 2: The weather is fine, isn’t it?
Friend 1: What are you talking about? Do you have the game?
Friend 2: I bought a new T-shirt yesterday.
Friend 1: Are you OK???
Friend 2: Yes. Why?
10 Já se z tebe zblázním. 11 rovnice
95
Appendix 6
John meets Jane
John is a young British student. He meets an attractive foreign student (Jane)
at school.
Task 1 Read the conversation and try to answer these questions:
1. Is Jane interested in meeting John?
2. Is John interested in meeting Jane?
3. Is John likely to loose interest in Jane?
4. What‟s wrong with the conversation?
5. Is it satisfactory for John?
Conversation John: Hello, where are you from?
Jane: Paris.
John: Oh, Paris…it‟s a beautiful city, isn‟t it…I was there 2 years ago. Why did you come to
London?
Jane: To study.
John: Oh, what are you studying?
Jane: Art.
John: Wow, interesting…so you‟re an artist…
Jane: Mm.
John: How long are you going to stay here?
Jane: Don‟t know yet.
Task 2 Try to change the conversation so that it‟s satisfactory for both John and Jane.
Conversation: John: Hello, where are you from?
Jane:
John:
Jane:
John:
Jane:
John:
Jane:
John:
Jane:
96
Appendix 7
The cooperative principle
People have to trust each other during a conversation for it to be successful. They expect:
1. that what others say is true=be true
2. that they will receive enough information; not too much, not too little=be brief
3. that others will speak to the point and stick to the topic=be relevant
4. that others will say everything clearly and logically and that it will make
sense=be clear However, sometimes, it is not possible to follow these principles. For such cases, there are
certain phrases that can be used to show that people know these rules, but it is not
possible for them to follow them.
Your task: Divide the expressions below into 4 groups according to their function:
a) I‟m not sure, but…
b) As far as I know1, …
c) As you probably know,
d) I‟m not sure if this makes sense, but …
e) Not to change the subject, but …
f) I don‟t know if this is clear at all, but …
g) I don‟t know if this is important, but …
h) I won‟t bore2 you with all the details, but …
1. Expressions that people use when they are not sure whether something is or isn‟t true:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Expressions that people use when they say more or less than is necessary:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Expressions that people use when they want to say something that is not connected with
the topic of conversation:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Expressions that people use when they want to say something that could be confusing3:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Pokud vím,.. 2. nudit 3. matoucí
97
Appendix 8
Secret messages for learners
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOP SECRET
Don’t tell them the truth! Lie! They mustn’t find out what your picture looks like.
Don’t describe your picture. Describe an imaginary one.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOP SECRET
Don’t tell them everything. Your motto is: The less, the better. Use as few
words as possible and give them as little information as possible. The best
answers are for example yes, no, mm, green, big etc.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOP SECRET
Don’t speak to the point. Talk about whatever you want, but not about your
picture. Make fun of your classmates. When they ask, for example, Did you draw
a house?, answer them, for example, I know that you can draw a house or I would
like to have a big house.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOP SECRET
Don’t speak clearly! Make it difficult for others to find out what your picture
looks like. Use expressions such as maybe, sort of, something like that, who
knows?, it’s difficult to say etc.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
98
Appendix 9
The puzzles
Task 1 - Find the letters in the joke below. Use the letters to make the topic of this lesson.
Joke
A teacher said, "Mary, I'd like you to give me a sentence beginning with 'I', please."
Mary thought for a few seconds and then said, "I is..."
The teacher interrupted her and said, "No Mary, you cannot begin a sentence with 'I is' - you
must use 'I am'."
Mary looked upset and said, "But Miss..."
The teacher shouted, "Give me a sentence beginning with 'I am', please."
Mary shrugged her shoulders and said, "I am the ninth letter of the alphabet."
1 the 1
st letter of the 2
nd word _____
the 4th
letter of the 18th
word _____
the 3rd
letter of the 19th
word _____
the 5th
letter of the 22nd
word _____
2 the 1
st letter of the 24
th word _____
the 2nd
letter of the 25th
word _____
the 4th
letter of the 50th
word _____
the 3rd
letter of the 53rd
word _____
the 3rd
letter of the 62nd
word _____
the 3rd
letter of the 63rd
word _____
The topic of today’s lesson is _____________________________________ .
Task 2 - I have prepared a short introduction to the topic, but a printer‟s gremlin12
made
merry13
in my computer and deleted vowels a and e. Could you supply the missing letters,
please?
Conv__rs__tion is __n __ctivity in which two or mor__ p__opl__ t__k__ turns __t
sp__ __king. Typically, only on__ p__rson sp____ks __t __ tim__ __nd oth__ers w__it until
h__/sh__ indic__t__s th__ __nd of his/h__r turn. Wh__n mor__ p__opl__ try to sp__ __k __t
th__ s__m__ tim__, it is c__ll__d simultan__ous or ov__rl__pping sp__ __ ch.
12 tiskařský šotek 13 řádit
99
Appendix 10
Turn-taking
Task 1 – Read the questions 1 and 2. Tick the correct answers and cross out the
wrong ones. Only 1 answer is wrong.
1. How do people finish their turns?
a) they use falling intonation14
at the end of their turn
b) they make a pause at the end of a sentence
c) they say: “Now it‟s your turn.”
d) they ask a question
2. If you don‟t want to loose your turn, you
a) fill pauses with words such as er, em, uh, ah
b) don‟t pause at the end of sentences
c) connect sentences by words like and, and then, so, but …
d) shout: “I want to speak longer.”
3. When people want to take a turn, while the other person is speaking, they indicate15
it by
different ways e.g. they start making short sounds, use facial expressions or body shifts.
Can you perform these ways?
Task 2 - Sheldon and Penny’s conversation
S: Penny, are you experiencing some sort of difficulty?
P: Yes, I can‟t get my stupid door opened.
S: You appear to have put your car key in the door lock…are you aware of that?
P: Yeah.
S: All right then.
P: Damn it, damn it, damn it, damn it, damn it.
S: Would it be possible for you to do this a little more quietly?
P: I can‟t get the damn key out.
S: Well, it‟s not surprising…that Baldwin lock on your door uses traditional edge-mounted
cylinders, whereas the key for your Volkswagen uses a centre cylinder system.
P: Thank you, Sheldon.
S: You‟re welcome. Why did you put your car key in the door lock?
P: Why? I‟ll tell you why…because today I had an audition…it took me 2 hours to get there, I
waited there for half and hour and before I could even start, they told me I look too
Midwest for the part…too Midwest…what the hell does that mean?
S: Well, the American Midwest was mostly settled by Scandinavian and Germanic people.
They have a characteristic facial bone structure.
P: I know what it means, Sheldon! God you know, I‟ve been in L.A. for almost 2 years now
and I haven‟t gotten a single acting job. I‟ve accomplished nothing, haven‟t gotten a rise at
work, haven‟t even had sex in 6 months and just now, when I was walking up those stairs
a fly flew in my mouth and I ate it!
14 ´klesnou hlasem´ 15 naznačit
100
Appendix 11
Exchanges
____________________________________________________________
Breakfast’s ready.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coming.
Hello.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi.
Would you like a cup of tea?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, please.
How are you?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fine, thanks.
Thanks a lot.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You’re welcome.
Is it yours?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, it is.
Gosh, it’s hot in here today.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I’ll open the window.
How’s she feeling?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No idea.
What’s up?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I’ve lost my keys.
101
Tra-la-la
I love parties!!! You‟re great dancers.
Appendix 12
Peter’s party
A – Your best friend has a party. You meet a person, who you don’t know. You
start the conversation.
A: 1. Are you Peter’s friend?
B:
Now choose the best reply in response to B:
A: 1. Strange, I’ve never seen you before.
2. Are those the people you’re with?
3. Oh, just curious. It’s always nice to see a new face.
B:
A: 1. You don’t like parties?
2. Oh, how interesting. I’m Peter’s best friend now.
3. No, but I’d love to meet her.
B:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
B – Your girlfriend’s classmate Peter has a party. You meet Peter’s friend there.
Choose the best reply to A.
A:
B: 1. Why do you ask?
2. No, I’m here with my friends.
3. Yes, I am.
A:
B: 1. We haven’t seen each other for ages, but we used to be best friends, when
we were children.
2. Yes, it’s my girlfriend Jane. Do you know her?
3. Yeah, I don’t go to parties very often.
A:
B: 1.Well, come on in and join us. I’m sure Jane would be delighted to meet you.
What’s your name?
2. Oh, that’s funny! Nice to meet you, Peter’s best friend.
3. Well, I do, but, you know, I’m a tennis player, so I usually have a
match on Saturday or Sunday and can’t go to parties very often.
Great party! Tra-la-la
You‟re great dancers.
102
Great idea!
Let’s go
swimming.
Great idea.
Let’s go
swimming.
Appendix 13
A cue-dialogue
Partner A
You meet B at school.
1. A: Greet B.
B:
2. A: Ask B how he/she is today.
B:
3. A: Ask B what he/she is going to do in the afternoon.
B:
4. A: Suggest somewhere to go together.
B:
5. A: Accept B´s suggestion.
B:
6. A: Suggest time and a meeting place.
B:
7. A: Say goodbye to B.
B:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Partner B
You meet A at school.
1. A:
B: Greet A.
2. A:
B: Say how you are.
3. A:
B: Answer A´s question.
4. A:
B: Reject A´s suggestion and suggest something different.
5. A:
B: Express pleasure.
6. A:
B: Agree on time and a meeting
place.
7. A:
B: Say goodbye to A.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
103
Appendix 14
Conversational features
What did you do
yesterday?
Early? I see. The party
was great; really
great…we had a great
time.
Oh, nothing special. I
just watched TV and
went to bed early.
What was your party?
Yeah. And what did
you do?
Wow! Did you?
I studied for my
English test. Then I
had a party.
104
Apendix 15
Turn-taking
Only 1 person
speaks at a time.
Show your interest by the
use of words such as uh-
huh, hmm, really?, wow…
Indicate that you‟re
listening by the nod or
shake of your head.
Raise or lower
your eyebrows.
Visibly take a deep
breath, when you
want to take a turn.
Stand up straighter,
when you want to
take a turn.
People take turns
when speaking.
Don‟t pause at the
end of a sentence,
if you don‟t want to
loose a turn.
Simultaneous or
overlapping
speech occurs.
Fill pauses with er, em,
uh etc. not to lose your
turn.
Provide 2 pieces of info
for every one question.
Return a
question with
another question.
105
Appendix 16
Dialogue building
106
Appendix 17
Two old friends meet up again 2
1. <S 1> Are you still playing er
2. <S 2> Guitar
3. <S 1> Irish music, yeah
4. <S 2> Well… no I don‟t, I mean I don‟t play that much as I did
5. <S 1> I thought you were touring the country at one point
6. <S 2> [laughs] No, I er … we go, we listen to it quite a lot, every time we go to Ireland we
7. erm, you know, seek out good musicians and er do quite a lot of listening and of
8. course we still buy a lot of records, bought a lot of records over the last few years,
9. but there‟s not actually anybody to play with around here, you know [<S 1>
10. mm] there‟s a there‟s a session every Sunday night in Cambridge in a pub and
11. that‟s erm about it… do you still listen to Scottish music?
12. <S 1>Well… very very little, cos you know, you just don‟t have the time, and with the
13. new house, and with the garden [<S 2> Mm] , well…occasionally I do, but not as
14. much as before
15. <S 2>Anyway, they take a lot of time, don‟t they, I mean kids?
16. <S 1>They take up a lot of, you know, normally, you get, if you‟re lucky they‟re all
17. tucked up in bed by eight-thirty [<S 2> mm] – that‟s if you‟re lucky, you see…
18. <S 2>Do they sleep all night without erm waking up, did they wake up last night,
19. they didn‟t [<S 1> no] did they?
20. <S 1>Jamie normally, you know, you put him in his cot and he‟s gone [<S 2> mm] he
21. sleeps he‟s very good at sleeping [<S 2> mm] Thomas is a bit of a pain [<S 2>ah]
22. all sort of things frighten him, you see [<S 2> yeah] wakes up with nightmares
23. and that [<S 2> does he] yeah some nights we change beds about three or four
24. times, he comes into our bed and there‟s not enough room and so I go into his bed
25. and he comes back in so to my bed and his bed and …
27. <S 2>Yeah, it‟s extraordinary to think they have bad dreams, well, they dream of
28. images they‟ve seen during the day, you see probably dream of that bloomin´ duck
29. or something
30. <S 1>Or it just might be a car, noisy car going past the window or something.
107
Appendix 18
Discourse markers
Discourse markers are words or phrases that themselves do not have any meaning, but do
have a very important role in conversation. They help us organize what we want to say and
they also help our partners understand what is being said. They can open, close or continue a
topic, indicate whether speakers share16
the same view of what is being talked about etc.
Task: Discourse markers have various functions. Join the discourse markers with their
functions:
1. WELL
2. YOU KNOW
3. I MEAN
4. YOU SEE
5. ANYWAY
16 sdílet
explains something previously said or
puts it more precisely
tells a listener that this is beginning
shows our unwillingness to give a
negative answer
can mark a new or different topic
signals things that a speaker thinks a
listener knows
signals that a speaker thinks that a
listener shares the same view of what
is being talked about
signals explanations
signals things that a speaker thinks a
listener does not know
used when a speaker wants to go
back to a previous topic
signals that the topic is coming
towards its end
used to move from one topic to
another
108
Appendix 19
Disappearing dialogue
What nice
earrings!
Do you like
them?
Yeah. They are
perfect! Silly, aren‟t they?
Silly green
nonsense. I like
things like that,
you know.
Where did you
buy them?
Well, there‟s a new
shop in the city
centre, you see.
Really? Anyway,
have you got
something green to
go with them?
Yeah. I am crazy
about green, you
know…
By the way, were
they expensive? Well, you
won‟t believe
it. Only twenty-
five p.
Wow! What a
bargain!
I know. It‟s a
laugh. Only
twenty-five p!
109
Appendix 20
ANYWAY
YOU KNOW
WELL
I MEAN
YOU SEE
YOU KNOW
I MEAN
WELL
YOU SEE
ANYWAY
