Agreeing to Disagree: "Doing Disagreement" in Assessed Oral L2 Interactions

Autor/in	Hüttner, Julia
Titel	Agreeing to Disagree: "Doing Disagreement" in Assessed Oral L2 Interactions
Quelle	In: Classroom Discourse, 5 (2014) 2, S.194-215 (22 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	1946-3014
DOI	10.1080/19463014.2014.893897
Schlagwörter	Oral Language; Second Language Learning; Speech Acts; German; Native Language; English (Second Language); Problem Solving; Decision Making; Advanced Students; Teaching Methods; Interaction; Groups; Context Effect; Classroom Communication; Discourse Analysis; Interviews; Language Tests; Secondary School Students; Foreign Countries; Secondary School Teachers; Second Language Instruction; Austria + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Oral interpretation; Mündlicher Sprachgebrauch; Zweitsprachenerwerb; Sprechakt; Deutscher; English as second language; English; Second Language; Englisch als Zweitsprache; Problemlösen; Decision-making; Entscheidungsfindung; Fortgeschrittener; Teaching method; Lehrmethode; Unterrichtsmethode; Interaktion; Klassengespräch; Diskursanalyse; Interviewing; Interviewtechnik; Language test; Sprachtest; Sekundarschüler; Ausland; Fremdsprachenunterricht; Österreich
Abstract	While disagreements are often considered dispreferred choices and potentially face-threatening acts due to their oppositional nature, this perception does not adequately reflect the importance of disagreeing for many types of interaction, such as problem-solving and decision-making. Developing ability in performing this speech act therefore becomes relevant for learners of an L2 in order to show achievements in such general language learning targets as expressing and defending opinions and arguments, as well as negotiating consensual decisions. This paper presents a sequential analysis of disagreements in assessed interactions of advanced German-speaking learners of English, observed in three different exam formats, i.e. teacher-led interview, role play with teacher and paired student interaction. Overall, 33 disagreement episodes were identified in 18 oral exams. Findings show that the choice of examination format constrains range and type of disagreement trajectory enacted by the learners, highlighting the influence of minor contextual differences. Moreover, analyses of these exams suggest that linguistic alignment can and does co-exist with oppositional talk, supporting the notion that the purpose of achieving a successful joint performance of L2 interaction carries weight even when there is disagreement on a content level. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 325 Chestnut Street Suite 800, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Fax: 215-625-2940; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2020/1/01