Applied Psycholinguistics 2:2 Book Reviews

James, L.A. A review of ?Discourse Analysis

in Second Language Research.? Applied Psycholinguistics, 1981, 2, 185-191.

Discourse analysis in second language research. D. Larsen-Freeman, (Ed.). Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House, 1980. Paperback. Pp. 187.

ÀÀÀ There is a good degree of self-consciousness involved in the task of doing a book review for a journal in ?applied psycholinguistics" since it stands to reason that writing a book review is an application of one?s ?psycholinguistic abilities.? This self-consciousness is amplified, in this case, given that the book under review is on ?discourse analysis.? In view of this double interest, I thought it well to give here not only a review of this book but, as well, a comment on the topic. Since the book editor?s intent was to introduce ESL-teachers (?English as a Second Language?) to ?What is discourse analysis,? it is pertinent to examine the answers the contributors provide. This then gets us into the ?topic? of discourse analysis, which is of course broader than the book, especially for readers of Applied Psycholinguistics.

ÀÀÀ The format. Short enough to be a special issue of AP, the book offers ten articles on research, method, and theory by ESL specialists who are united through the joint focus of the editor D. Larsen-Freeman. The 19 contributors are, in order of appearance, E. Hatch, M. H. Long, M. Celce-Murcia, S. Vander Brook, K. Schlue, C. Campbell, B. Fraser, E. Rintell, J. Walters, D. Godfrey, B. Arthur, R. Weiner, M. Culver, Y. Ja Lee, D. Thomas, W. H. Gaskill, J. Schwartz, S. Peck, R. L. Allwright.

There is a review of the books content by the editor in a brief introduction. There is no index, but the use of large bold face types throughout the book makes it easy to identify topics and subtopics as one thumbs through the pages. There are about 200 references cited in total. My impression is that the ideas of the following writers are most central to the work on discourse analysis by ESL-specialists: Austin, Bellack, Bolinger, Chafe, Chomsky, Coulthard, Ervin-Tripp, Ferguson, Flanders, Goffman, Grice, Gumperz, Halliday, Hatch, Henzel, Hymes, Labov, Mehan, Politzer, Richards, Sacks, Searle, Schegloff, Stevick.

ÀÀÀ The terminology. I found nothing in the articles that was too technical from the point of view of ?psycholinguistics.? Methodologically, the articles were varied and include literature reviews, grammatical analyses of errors by ESL-learners under various conditions, conversational and textual analyses, and case-history. The most recurrent background orientation theoretically, is that of sociolinguistics and ethno methodology. Table 1 lists those terms, which I had underlined in the course of my reading of the book. They represent the presuppositional elements of ?discourse analysis theory? as presented in this book. These are the technical concepts and ?background assumptions? held in common by the contributors, that is, their ?cognitive map.

ÀÀÀ The arguments. I will list what seem to me the most important or noteworthy propositions about discourse analysis which can be found in this book. However, since I am writing this for a readership specializing in psycholinguistics and psychology, rather than linguistics and ESL, I shall not necessarily use the same terminology as the authors use in the articles being reviewed. Later in this review, I shall have occasion to comment on this overlap in terminology, and its significance for the acceptance of ?discourse analysis? as a topic in psycholinguistics.

I shall now present 17 propositions as found in my annotations in the margins of the book. These represent how I tried to make sense and integrate the information on discourse analysis to be found in this book.

A.ÀÀÀ Discourse analysis is a method for generating data about the characteristics of natural speech events. This orientation attempts to connect linguistic phenomena to their communicative function. This last concept implies ?natural? social settings where speech events take place during social interaction and exchange. (Hatch/Long)

B.ÀÀ Research and theory in discourse analysis involves the mapping of the connections that can be found between linguistic speech data and the communicative function they serve in particular social circumstances. (Hatch/Long)

C.ÀÀ This mapping process has been successful thus far in research on public or formal encounters, perhaps because the social and linguistic connection can be made explicit as role phenomena. (Hatch/Long)

D.ÀÀ Research on discourse structure reveals two levels of choice behavior in speech: one, utterance form, which involves the active management of the rituals (?rules?) of talk; the other, utterance content, which involves the active management of feeling reactions (?affect?) as these occur in social relationships. (Hatch/Long)

E.ÀÀ Contextual analysis of English (a type of discourse analysis) is the task of discovering and learning the distribution frequency of linguistic forms for discourse types (e.g., œwritten or spoken, planned or unplanned, spontaneous or elicited?). ESL teachers would find this profitable. (e.g., examining ?the function and frequency of the passive voice in formal scientific writing in order to improve the English technical writing skills of nonnative-speaking engineers?). (Celce-Murcia)

F.ÀÀÀ Particular social contexts govern appropriate and normative speech role behaviors (e.g., ?He doesn?t have much money.? vs. ?He doesn?t have a lot of money.? Again: ?I did the job.? vs. ?I myself did the job.?)

(Celce-Murcia)

Table 1.À The discourse œcontent of ?discourse analysis? talk and the pages on which they appear

Linguistics pragmatics I Speech act 3, 77 Speech event 4 ff Conversation 4, 139 Implicature 5 Context 7 Narrative descriptions 8 Discourse units 9 Communication routines 10 Sociolinguists 10 Text analysis 10 Paragraph writing 11 Back-channeling 12,31 Skill in monologue development 12 Oral discourse 13 Talk data 13 Planned speech 13 Written discourse 13 Unplanned oral discourse 13 Deictics 13 Real conversations 14 Text types 16 Pedagogic function 18 Transaction 19 Situation 19 Tactics 19 Back-shadowing 21 Real-time coding 25

Videotapes 25 Classroom discourse analysis 25 Communication game 25 Conversational analysis 28, 138 Directives 28 Commissives 28 Warrants 29 Transcripts 30 Communication model 30 Conversational signals 30 Ritual constraints 31 Territoriality 31 Management of conversations 32 Semiotics 35 Contextual analysis 41 Conversational discourse 41 Pragmatic analysis 44 Acceptability of judgments 51 Modified close procedure 51 Yes/No Questions 57 Shared knowledge 59 Presupposition of Yes/No answers 59ff. Social setting 75 Sociolinguistic competence 75 Pragmatic 75 Role-playing 75 Research paradigms 75

Competence/Performance distinction 76 Acceptability 76 Grammaticality 76 Pragmatic competence 77 Social context 77, 112 Communicative competence 78 Conversational interaction 78 Ethno methodological studies 78 Utterance level 78 Semantic formulas/strategies 79 Language-culture pairing 79 Contextual factors 81 Formulaic strategies 85 Sociolinguistics variation 87 Naturalistic request 88 Error rates 92 Self-corrections 101 Topic-related continuities 109 Topic continuity maintenance 109 Subtopic continuities 109 Episode boundaries 109 Extra linguistic details 109 Foreigner talk 111 Foreigner register 112 Language switching 112

Register shifting 112 Classroom language 113 Speech dyads 113 Content analysis 120 Correction phenomenon 125 ff Modulation 127 Pause 127 Transcription symbols 137, 153, 164, l68?9 Discourse environment 138 Negotiation 138 Repairs 1 38 ff Self-repairs 141 ff Language play 154ff Modeling 155, 167. 175 Intrinsic motivation 157 Practice opportunities 160 Affective climate 160 Case studies 165 ff Learning situations 166 Management of participation À166 Management of learning I 66 Macro-analysis 166 Turn-taking analysis 168ff. Topic analysis I74ff. Task analysis 178ff.

Applied Psycholinguistics 2:2

Book Reviews

G.ÀÀ Observed variations in linguistic form are places that mark salient social psychological features. Therefore, contextual analysis is a form of analysis of variance for discovering the cognitive organization of social attitudes, rules, and expectations in a community. This may be conceptualized as a Psycholinguistic Atlas, leading one to make empirically testable hypotheses regarding acceptability judgments, as a dependent measure (e.g., Suppose it was discovered that Shakespeare had a secret co-author; would you then say ?Shakespeare wrote with Smith? or ?Smith wrote with Shakespeare??) (Celce-Murcia)

H.ÀÀ Variations in linguistic form (e.g., ?Do you like artichokes?? vs. ?You like artichokes??) have empirically identifiable casual factors in their social context. Such an empirical ethno semantic matrix or taxonomy has already been attempted (included are 7 main levels ? e.g., linguistic, semantic, situational, etc., and 23 sub-levels e.g., under ?semantic?, planned vs. unplanned action). (Celce-Murcia) (Vander Brook/Schlue/ Campbell)

I.ÀÀÀÀ Second language acquisition involves learning discourse analysis since natives use utterance form (syntax and intonation) to signal presuppositions (e.g., perspective, shared knowledge, degree of certainty)

(Vander Brook/Schlue/Campbell)

J.ÀÀÀ Second language learners use a type of contrastive discourse analysis which helps them become aware of cross-cultural differences and similarities in the ritual strategies of speech acts (e.g., when learners doing role-playing vary the form of requests in hypothetical social circumstances). (Fraser/Rintell/ Walters)

K.ÀÀ Role-playing can be used to discover the repertoire of semantic strategies speakers use under specified (experimental) conditions. By contrasting native patterns or normative models with patterns emitted by a particular group (child vs. adult; native vs. foreigner; popular vs. loner; etc.), the researcher has available a convenient methodology for investigating social psycholinguistic and developmental psycholinguistic phenomena (?Pragmatic Competence?). (Fraser/Rintell/ Walters)

L.ÀÀÀ Linguistic errors made by second language learners (e.g., tense) can sometimes be traced to the inability of maintaining topic-related continuity. Episode boundaries and extra linguistic details are often sources of distraction. (Godfrey)

M.ÀÀ Certain variations in linguistic form are controlled by audience factors (e.g., is the listener a child? a foreigner?). This is called register shifting (e.g., regular vs. simplified and, elaborate vs. simple). By varying speech dyads on sociological and sociopsychological dimensions (e.g., selected foreigners calling up airline ticket agents and asking unexpected questions), the investigator can then use the linguistic, semantic, and topicalization strategies observed in the dyadic exchange to discover the cognitive dynamics of speech behavior. (Arthur/Weiner/Culver/Lee/ Thomas)

N.ÀÀ Social talk has an interactive discourse structure (e.g., what a speaker says can routinely be modified or ?corrected?: This is called, modulation). By examining the places in discourse where such interactive discourse occurs, the investigator can map the distributional features of self-correction and other-correction in conversation (e.g., uncertainty loci, disagreements, restatements, etc.). (Gaskill)

0.ÀÀÀ By structuring the context of a group conversation through instructions or role-playing (i.e., the discourse environment), the researcher can analyze the ensuing interactive discourse in larger discourse segments than the usual sentence, utterance, or talking turn (e.g., how interactants negotiate ?repair? in topicalization work. Second language learners appear to do this similarly to native speakers. (Schwartz)

PÀÀÀ Young children use language play to practice and expand their speech repertoire. Social play in child - child discourse is ?intrinsically motivating? in cooperative and competitive exchanges, and is accompanied by intense positive or negative affect (e.g., joy vs. frustration). (Peck)

Q.ÀÀ Sociological and social psychological facts can be uncovered through the case-study approach in which the speech behavior of a single speaker in a conversation is analyzed with regards to turn taking topic management, and cognitive operations. (Allwright)

Table 2. The terminology used in the 17 propositions about discourse analysis

Overlapping terminology (with book contributors)

Non-overlapping terminology (contributed by author of this review)

Discourse analysis Linguistic phenomena Social setting Public encounters Utterance form Management rituals Utterance content Feeling reactions Contextual analysis Discourse types Social contexts Acceptability judgments Presuppositions Strategies of speech acts Role-playing Turn-taking analysis Topic continuity Episode boundaries Extra linguistic details Register shifting Speech dyads Modulation Self-correction (repair) Other-correction (repair) Restatements Negotiation Discourse environment Child-child discourse Language play Case-study approach Topic management Cognitive operations

Natural speech events Communicative function Social interaction Mapping Linguistic speech data Social circumstances Role phenomena Discourse structure Choice behavior Distributional frequency *Speech role behaviors Analysis of variance Cognitive organization *Psycholinguistic Atlas Empirically identifiable * Ethno semantic matrix Contrastive discourse analysis Cross-cultural differences *Normative speech role modeling Native Patterns *Sociopsycholinguistic Developmental psycholinguistic phenomena Audience factors Sociopsychological dimensions *Topicalization work Cognitive dynamics * Interactive discourse Distributional features Uncertainty loci Speech repertoire

*Neologisms from the conceptual apparatus of my own work in psycholinguistics.

These are then the 17 propositions I was able to extract from the book. I found that in order to make the books content meaningful, I had to paraphrase and translate their discourse into my own cognitive framework. My impression was that my discourse about ?discourse analysis? ? or my ?meta-discourse,? was quite different from the book?s meta-discourse. However I changed my mind when I actually ran a contrastive check, as shown in Table 2.

As can be seen, the overall terminology I needed for my meta-discourse overlaps about 50 percent with that of the book, and most of the nonoverlap is closely related in meaning and theoretical compatibility. I was glad about that because it indicates that discourse analysis may yet be adopted as an additional methodology in psycholinguistics and in social psychology.

ÀÀÀ

ÀÀÀ The implications. In conclusion, I wish to point out some of the implications of adopting discourse analysis as an additional methodology for psycholinguistics. A bird?s eye view of the ?argument outline? presented by this book may be schematized as follows:

SOCIAL SETTING FACTORS

-social interactions

-determines communicative function

ÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀ INDEPENDENT

Mapping task for DISCOURSE ANALYSIS

ÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀ CONDITIONÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀ

SPEECH EVENTS -variations in linguistic form

ÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀ DEPENDENT

ÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀ VARIABLEÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀ

This shows that discourse analysis as a proposed methodology for investigating psycholinguistic phenomena consists of mapping operations. The predictions on researchable issues will involve linguistic form as a dependent variable, and will employ social setting factors as the independent manipulation. The findings reported in this book on discourse analysis correspond to previous treatments of the topic (e.g., by Clark & Clark, Psychology and Language, Harcourt Brace, 1977, Chapter 6). What this book provides in addition, I believe, is the information that lies in the nitty-gritty of actual research-oriented attempts to map the interface between linguistic choice, behavior and social psychological theory.

The value of the book is enhanced in this respect in that the contributors are doing applied research on social theory, that is, language teaching. What?s most notable about this orientation is the extent to which it is relevant not only to psycholinguistic theory, and not only to applied psycholinguistics, but to social psychological theory as well. The latter, in my estimation, sorely needs an alternative to laboratory experimentation with ?deception designs,? and so it?s good to have discourse analysis as an additional method of investigation. As developed thus far in the language teaching specialty, discourse analysis turns out to be a new powerful tool for investigating social theory in its everyday natural ?field? context. The editor, D. Larsen-Freeman, is to be congratulated for presenting a new and successful integration in a familiar context.

The contributors ought also to be congratulated for advancing applied social theory and psycholinguistics by establishing through evidence the following facts:

1.ÀÀÀ The existence of speech roles, which is to say that speakers manage to stick to constricted choices in their utterances, choices which are shown to depend on standard ?models? (ideal behaviors).

2.ÀÀÀ The existence of two levels of choice behavior in speech: utterance form and utterance content. Variation in utterance form is shown to depend on the behavioral task of managing the rituals of social talk, while variation in utterance content is dependent on