Naming an activity: Arriving at recognitionals in team-teacher planning talk

Based on a video-recorded corpus of pre-class planning sessions, this study focuses on how team-teachers from different cultural and linguistic backgrounds accomplish the interactional task of identifying and explaining pedagogical activities they will later teach together during an English as a For...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of pragmatics 2018-03, Vol.126, p.52-67
Hauptverfasser: Greer, Tim, Leyland, Chris
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 67
container_issue
container_start_page 52
container_title Journal of pragmatics
container_volume 126
creator Greer, Tim
Leyland, Chris
description Based on a video-recorded corpus of pre-class planning sessions, this study focuses on how team-teachers from different cultural and linguistic backgrounds accomplish the interactional task of identifying and explaining pedagogical activities they will later teach together during an English as a Foreign Language (EFL) lesson. Since a basic issue for these teachers is arriving at a recognizable name for the proposed task that can be understood by both parties, we analyze the interactional practices involved in naming an activity. We draw on Conversation Analytic (CA) research on word choice to show how sequential, categorical, epistemic and bilingual practices are brought to bear on the joint accomplishment of a recognitional formulation of an activity. We identify several interactional practices in which recognitionals play a key role in planning talk between language teachers. Speakers can treat the activity name as potentially unrecognizable through post-formulation explanations or initiating epistemic questions, or use a known recognitional to explain a new activity. Additionally, after a speaker lists the sub-steps involved in a proposed task, a recipient can proffer a name for the activity. These generic interactional practices are put to use in this intercultural workplace to make the plan accessible to all parties. The data are in English and Japanese. •CA is used to analyze the interactional practices involved in naming an activity.•Speakers use epistemic questions to treat an activity name as non-recognized.•Explaining the name after its formulation tacitly treats it as non-recognizable.•Interactants can co-formulate the name subsequent to a description of the activity.•Recognitionals can be the basis for explaining a modified version of the activity.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.pragma.2017.11.009
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2067358976</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0378216617302369</els_id><sourcerecordid>2067358976</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c424t-15776d8ece9c3aa3ab2edeccd23736d8d794b79f6318b1575389c1e9476926c53</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kEFLwzAUx4MoOKffwEPBc2te0yaNB2EMp8LQi55Dlr7N1DWtaTbYtzelnr3khbzf-_PyI-QWaAYU-H2T9V7vWp3lFEQGkFEqz8gMKiFTYJU4JzPKRJXmwPkluRqGhlIKBaMzsn7TrXW7RLtEm2CPNpwekoX38Ta-hsSj6XbOBts5vR8S65KAuk3jYb7QJ_1eOzeiQe-_r8nFNkJ481fn5HP19LF8Sdfvz6_LxTo1RV6EFEoheF2hQWmY1kxvcqzRmDpngsVGLWSxEXLLGVSbCJeskgZQFoLLnJuSzcndlNv77ueAQ1BNd_DjfiqnXLCykoJHqpgo47th8LhVvbet9icFVI3eVKMmb2r0pgBU9BbHHqcxjD84WvRqMBadwdpGF0HVnf0_4BfYEHgI</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2067358976</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Naming an activity: Arriving at recognitionals in team-teacher planning talk</title><source>Sociological Abstracts</source><source>Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)</source><creator>Greer, Tim ; Leyland, Chris</creator><creatorcontrib>Greer, Tim ; Leyland, Chris</creatorcontrib><description>Based on a video-recorded corpus of pre-class planning sessions, this study focuses on how team-teachers from different cultural and linguistic backgrounds accomplish the interactional task of identifying and explaining pedagogical activities they will later teach together during an English as a Foreign Language (EFL) lesson. Since a basic issue for these teachers is arriving at a recognizable name for the proposed task that can be understood by both parties, we analyze the interactional practices involved in naming an activity. We draw on Conversation Analytic (CA) research on word choice to show how sequential, categorical, epistemic and bilingual practices are brought to bear on the joint accomplishment of a recognitional formulation of an activity. We identify several interactional practices in which recognitionals play a key role in planning talk between language teachers. Speakers can treat the activity name as potentially unrecognizable through post-formulation explanations or initiating epistemic questions, or use a known recognitional to explain a new activity. Additionally, after a speaker lists the sub-steps involved in a proposed task, a recipient can proffer a name for the activity. These generic interactional practices are put to use in this intercultural workplace to make the plan accessible to all parties. The data are in English and Japanese. •CA is used to analyze the interactional practices involved in naming an activity.•Speakers use epistemic questions to treat an activity name as non-recognized.•Explaining the name after its formulation tacitly treats it as non-recognizable.•Interactants can co-formulate the name subsequent to a description of the activity.•Recognitionals can be the basis for explaining a modified version of the activity.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0378-2166</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1879-1387</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.pragma.2017.11.009</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Amsterdam: Elsevier B.V</publisher><subject>Activity reference ; Bilingualism ; Classroom communication ; Conversation analysis ; Conversational language ; Cultural heritage ; Cultural identity ; English as a second language ; English as a second language instruction ; English language ; Formulation ; Japanese language ; Language planning ; Linguistics ; Naming ; Recognitionals ; Second language teachers ; Speaking ; Teachers ; Team teaching ; Workplace interaction</subject><ispartof>Journal of pragmatics, 2018-03, Vol.126, p.52-67</ispartof><rights>2017 Elsevier B.V.</rights><rights>Copyright Elsevier Science Ltd. Mar 2018</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c424t-15776d8ece9c3aa3ab2edeccd23736d8d794b79f6318b1575389c1e9476926c53</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c424t-15776d8ece9c3aa3ab2edeccd23736d8d794b79f6318b1575389c1e9476926c53</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2017.11.009$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27924,27925,33774,45995</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Greer, Tim</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Leyland, Chris</creatorcontrib><title>Naming an activity: Arriving at recognitionals in team-teacher planning talk</title><title>Journal of pragmatics</title><description>Based on a video-recorded corpus of pre-class planning sessions, this study focuses on how team-teachers from different cultural and linguistic backgrounds accomplish the interactional task of identifying and explaining pedagogical activities they will later teach together during an English as a Foreign Language (EFL) lesson. Since a basic issue for these teachers is arriving at a recognizable name for the proposed task that can be understood by both parties, we analyze the interactional practices involved in naming an activity. We draw on Conversation Analytic (CA) research on word choice to show how sequential, categorical, epistemic and bilingual practices are brought to bear on the joint accomplishment of a recognitional formulation of an activity. We identify several interactional practices in which recognitionals play a key role in planning talk between language teachers. Speakers can treat the activity name as potentially unrecognizable through post-formulation explanations or initiating epistemic questions, or use a known recognitional to explain a new activity. Additionally, after a speaker lists the sub-steps involved in a proposed task, a recipient can proffer a name for the activity. These generic interactional practices are put to use in this intercultural workplace to make the plan accessible to all parties. The data are in English and Japanese. •CA is used to analyze the interactional practices involved in naming an activity.•Speakers use epistemic questions to treat an activity name as non-recognized.•Explaining the name after its formulation tacitly treats it as non-recognizable.•Interactants can co-formulate the name subsequent to a description of the activity.•Recognitionals can be the basis for explaining a modified version of the activity.</description><subject>Activity reference</subject><subject>Bilingualism</subject><subject>Classroom communication</subject><subject>Conversation analysis</subject><subject>Conversational language</subject><subject>Cultural heritage</subject><subject>Cultural identity</subject><subject>English as a second language</subject><subject>English as a second language instruction</subject><subject>English language</subject><subject>Formulation</subject><subject>Japanese language</subject><subject>Language planning</subject><subject>Linguistics</subject><subject>Naming</subject><subject>Recognitionals</subject><subject>Second language teachers</subject><subject>Speaking</subject><subject>Teachers</subject><subject>Team teaching</subject><subject>Workplace interaction</subject><issn>0378-2166</issn><issn>1879-1387</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kEFLwzAUx4MoOKffwEPBc2te0yaNB2EMp8LQi55Dlr7N1DWtaTbYtzelnr3khbzf-_PyI-QWaAYU-H2T9V7vWp3lFEQGkFEqz8gMKiFTYJU4JzPKRJXmwPkluRqGhlIKBaMzsn7TrXW7RLtEm2CPNpwekoX38Ta-hsSj6XbOBts5vR8S65KAuk3jYb7QJ_1eOzeiQe-_r8nFNkJ481fn5HP19LF8Sdfvz6_LxTo1RV6EFEoheF2hQWmY1kxvcqzRmDpngsVGLWSxEXLLGVSbCJeskgZQFoLLnJuSzcndlNv77ueAQ1BNd_DjfiqnXLCykoJHqpgo47th8LhVvbet9icFVI3eVKMmb2r0pgBU9BbHHqcxjD84WvRqMBadwdpGF0HVnf0_4BfYEHgI</recordid><startdate>201803</startdate><enddate>201803</enddate><creator>Greer, Tim</creator><creator>Leyland, Chris</creator><general>Elsevier B.V</general><general>Elsevier Science Ltd</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7T9</scope><scope>7U4</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><scope>DWI</scope><scope>WZK</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201803</creationdate><title>Naming an activity: Arriving at recognitionals in team-teacher planning talk</title><author>Greer, Tim ; Leyland, Chris</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c424t-15776d8ece9c3aa3ab2edeccd23736d8d794b79f6318b1575389c1e9476926c53</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Activity reference</topic><topic>Bilingualism</topic><topic>Classroom communication</topic><topic>Conversation analysis</topic><topic>Conversational language</topic><topic>Cultural heritage</topic><topic>Cultural identity</topic><topic>English as a second language</topic><topic>English as a second language instruction</topic><topic>English language</topic><topic>Formulation</topic><topic>Japanese language</topic><topic>Language planning</topic><topic>Linguistics</topic><topic>Naming</topic><topic>Recognitionals</topic><topic>Second language teachers</topic><topic>Speaking</topic><topic>Teachers</topic><topic>Team teaching</topic><topic>Workplace interaction</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Greer, Tim</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Leyland, Chris</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts (LLBA)</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)</collection><jtitle>Journal of pragmatics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Greer, Tim</au><au>Leyland, Chris</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Naming an activity: Arriving at recognitionals in team-teacher planning talk</atitle><jtitle>Journal of pragmatics</jtitle><date>2018-03</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>126</volume><spage>52</spage><epage>67</epage><pages>52-67</pages><issn>0378-2166</issn><eissn>1879-1387</eissn><abstract>Based on a video-recorded corpus of pre-class planning sessions, this study focuses on how team-teachers from different cultural and linguistic backgrounds accomplish the interactional task of identifying and explaining pedagogical activities they will later teach together during an English as a Foreign Language (EFL) lesson. Since a basic issue for these teachers is arriving at a recognizable name for the proposed task that can be understood by both parties, we analyze the interactional practices involved in naming an activity. We draw on Conversation Analytic (CA) research on word choice to show how sequential, categorical, epistemic and bilingual practices are brought to bear on the joint accomplishment of a recognitional formulation of an activity. We identify several interactional practices in which recognitionals play a key role in planning talk between language teachers. Speakers can treat the activity name as potentially unrecognizable through post-formulation explanations or initiating epistemic questions, or use a known recognitional to explain a new activity. Additionally, after a speaker lists the sub-steps involved in a proposed task, a recipient can proffer a name for the activity. These generic interactional practices are put to use in this intercultural workplace to make the plan accessible to all parties. The data are in English and Japanese. •CA is used to analyze the interactional practices involved in naming an activity.•Speakers use epistemic questions to treat an activity name as non-recognized.•Explaining the name after its formulation tacitly treats it as non-recognizable.•Interactants can co-formulate the name subsequent to a description of the activity.•Recognitionals can be the basis for explaining a modified version of the activity.</abstract><cop>Amsterdam</cop><pub>Elsevier B.V</pub><doi>10.1016/j.pragma.2017.11.009</doi><tpages>16</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0378-2166
ispartof Journal of pragmatics, 2018-03, Vol.126, p.52-67
issn 0378-2166
1879-1387
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2067358976
source Sociological Abstracts; Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)
subjects Activity reference
Bilingualism
Classroom communication
Conversation analysis
Conversational language
Cultural heritage
Cultural identity
English as a second language
English as a second language instruction
English language
Formulation
Japanese language
Language planning
Linguistics
Naming
Recognitionals
Second language teachers
Speaking
Teachers
Team teaching
Workplace interaction
title Naming an activity: Arriving at recognitionals in team-teacher planning talk
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-01T18%3A07%3A34IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Naming%20an%20activity:%20Arriving%20at%20recognitionals%20in%20team-teacher%20planning%20talk&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20pragmatics&rft.au=Greer,%20Tim&rft.date=2018-03&rft.volume=126&rft.spage=52&rft.epage=67&rft.pages=52-67&rft.issn=0378-2166&rft.eissn=1879-1387&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.pragma.2017.11.009&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2067358976%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2067358976&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_els_id=S0378216617302369&rfr_iscdi=true