Conversational Topic Discontinuity Markers in
Taiwanese EFL Classrooms
Ming-Chu Liao (廖明珠)
Dr. David S. D. Tseng (曾守得)
Abstract
As cited by previous sociolinguistic researchers, the phenomenon of topic continuity in
speech has received significant attention. Scant research has focused on what, how, and why
discontinuity occurs. This study explores the four most frequently identified markers (pause,
repair, overlap, and interruption) in Taiwanese senior high school English classrooms, three of
which had observations conducted in them: one all-male, one all-female, and one co-ed,
respectively. Subsequent retrospective interview protocols were administered in order to elicit
information from teachers concerning their perspectives on the observed data. Results of the
21 sessions revealed divergent distribution of the four discontinuity markers for all-male and
all-female classes. Culture and gender had a significant impact on the highest and lowest
incidences of classroom conversational topic discontinuity. Additionally, teachers reported
their perceptions of the reasons which led to the four markers influencing occurrence of topic
discontinuity. At the end of this paper the author discusses educational implications and
suggestions for further study. The findings may shed some light on the management of
turn-taking and topic maintenance in the classroom for EFL teacher training.
Keywords: sociolinguistic, topic continuity, topic discontinuity marker, classroom
observation, retrospective interview protocol
1
Social functions play a vital role in the conversation interaction management of
language, with society and language being closely intertwined. Interaction in EFL
classrooms is initiated either by the teacher or students to make their topic continue or
discontinue, with the management of conversational topics playing an essential role. It
is critical to explore which discontinuity markers proved decisive in conversational
topics. Tsao (1979, 1988, 1990) suggested that as far as basic conversational topics
are concerned, a “topic chain” is a basic unit. It might take the form of a combination
of naturally flowing sentences where the noun in the first sentence represents the topic
of conversation. Chafe (1994) treated a discourse topic as an idea unit that can only
reside in the speaker's peripheral or semi-active consciousness. Chui (2003) suggested
that a topic is introduced by a logical sequence of sentence clauses relating to the
same subject. Topics then come together with other topics, showing semantic
connection to complete a chain, which exhibits a common theme in each related topic,
whose boundaries are set by significant variation of time, place, character or event.
Numerous studies have dealt with conversational topics (Button & Casey,1985;
Foppa, 1990; Heyman, 1986; Maynard & Zimmerman, 1984; Tannen, 1989).
Coulthard (1985) examined distribution of single features of interaction, such as topic
control and topic discontinuity markers in addition to variant combination of features.
Among these studies, the most important element of conversational language has been
topic development. In addition, these studies have noted the importance of two
components in topic development: “progression” and “maintenance” (Bergmann,
1990). Topic progression tends to ensure topic flow by demanding contribution to the
interaction. Topic maintenance assists coherence of the unfolding discourse ensuring
that speakers remain on a topic. Typically, the natural linkage between an utterance
and the second speaker’s contribution to the conversation contributes to topic
development when new material is introduced to the subject under discussion,
sustaining discourse. In order to maintain this development, each speaker must
individually and simultaneously assess whether a given sequence of utterances form a
logically connected text. Yet speakers are not limited to this developmental pattern.
Having acquired a turn, the participant may determine direction of the conversation
by developing the same topic, changing to another topic, or reallocating a speaking
turn to an alternative party (Ng & Bradac, 1993). That is, speakers change topics with
recognizable boundaries, resulting in topic discontinuity (Chafe, 1987; van Dijk, 1981;
van Dijk and Kintsch, 1983).
Earlier research found discontinuity markers affecting conversational turn-taking
(Chui, 2001; Schiffrin, 1987; van Dijk and Kintsch, 1983; West & Zimmerman, 1983).
Pausing and repair are used in the main to recover the discourse where it has become
inactive through a conversational impasse within the boundaries of a paragraph theme
2
(Givon, 1993). More substantial or frequent pauses become more common following
a change of subject (Chui, 2001), with particular significance in speech production:
e.g., pause before a less predictable word signifies difficulty in lexical access.
Alternatively, Shei (2005) noted that in a Chinese speaker’s retrospection, pause is a
highly unlikely feature before Chinese sentence final particles (SFP). In addition, Fox,
Hayashi & Jasperson (1996) stated that English repair is based upon traditional syntax,
where the repairing segment does not recycle back to the verb if repair is initiated
post-verbally for syntactic constraint. The extent of an English cycle further depends
upon whether the repair is initiated at the outset of a turn. Repair is typically
occasioned by problems of understanding. Levelt (1983) defined repair as organized
ways of dealing with various kinds of trouble in interaction’s progress, such as
mishearing or misunderstanding. He has further clarified that repair phenomena do
not form regular parts of talk-in-interaction. Tseng (2006) explored the organization of
repair in Chinese conversation and found that repairs tend to recycle only the word
immediately prior to the repair source, regardless of its category. If the preceding
word is part of a complex noun phrase, recycling is blocked and quantity tends toward
essential versus lexical-form complexity. Its significance becomes more apparent
when a speaker attempts to resume the conversation as soon as possible and maintain
the process. Zelinsky-Wibbelt (2003) defined both overlap and interruption as means
used to discontinue a topic and take command of the speaking turn. Overlap occurs
during instances of slight over-anticipation by the next speaker. Instead of beginning
to speak immediately following the current speaker’s turn, the next speaker begins to
speak at the very end of a current speaker’s turn, overlapping the last word or last part
of his or her utterance. In other instances, interruption is traditionally associated with
violation of conversational rules, and an attempt to dominate interaction via control of
the floor and topic of conversation. Here the next speaker begins at some point in the
current speaker’s turn, unidentifiable as a last word. With discourse topics
hierarchically and non-linearly organized, one conversational topic can be disrupted
by another, which in turn continues or discontinues (Waltereit, 2002).
Numerous previous studies explored factors related to continuity within topics in
daily conversations (Amfo, 2001; Andersen, 1998; Foster, 1983; Givón, 1983, 1993),
yet few examined what gave rise to discontinuity (Chui, 2002; Reboul & Moeschler,
1997), not to mention discontinuity markers in classroom settings. Discourse in daily
dialog differs from that in a classroom setting; the latter is topic-based (Coulthard,
1985; Foster, 1986; Martinez-Marquez, 1989) with highly structured turn-taking
interaction patterns between teachers and learners (Chen, 1983). Among discontinuity
markers observed previously, pause, repair, overlap and interruption were most
frequently and directly identified in EFL context (Chui, 2000, 2001; Liu, & Chang,
3
2005). Results of this research would have provided more insight had they addressed
language use in an EFL classroom setting.
Generally speaking, senior high schools contain three types of classes: all-male,
all-female, and co-ed. This study explores the conversational discontinuity markers in
each type of class, addressing the following research questions:
(a) What are the frequency respective distribution differences among the four topic
discontinuity markers in EFL senior high classrooms?
(b) How do classes differ in frequency distribution among the discontinuity markers?
(c) How do teachers’ perceptions differ from actual performance in class?
METHOD
School Settings
The three senior high schools chosen in this study are located in Taiwan and
identified as Schools A (all-male), B (all-female), and C (co-ed).
Teacher Participants
One female English teacher was selected from each school; she and her class of
senior high school students took part in this study. Teachers were non-native English
speakers and averaged 28 years of age. Each held a masters’ degree from a normal
university and averaged 2.7 years of teaching experience.
Student Participants
The three classes were all 10th grade classes and taught by Teacher A, B and C
respectively. They were one all-male class, one all-female class, and one co-ed class
and identified as Class A, Class B, and Class C respectively. The number of students
in Classes A to C was 47, 48 and 48 respectively. Based upon their scores on
simulated GEPT elementary tests and on senior high school entrance examination
English tests, the students in the three classes were found to be homogenous in
English proficiency levels (t = .499, p = .621).
Instruments
Classroom Observation
Each teacher was observed for one lesson unit for one class for between five and
eight sessions. One unit covers sections of vocabulary and phrases, reading passages,
supplementary materials, and test explanation. The focus of study was not revealed to
the observed teachers and students to exclude researcher-respondent interaction. A
total of 21 sessions, each 50 minutes long, in these classes were videotaped and
observed with notes by the researcher herself. All utterances were transcribed
verbatim in the very language used by the observed teachers and students for
advanced analysis.
4
Retrospective Interview Protocol
After each teacher’s observation was completed, an interview was conducted with
the three teachers respectively. The interview was designed to elicit teachers’ verbal
reports of their perceptions of occurrences of topic discontinuity. Interviews were
videotaped and transcribed verbatim for further analysis.
Data Analysis
Generally, analysis of qualitative data proceeded in four steps: coding, categorizing,
description and interpretation. Based on structuring of topic chains, transcripts were
first categorized in terms of linguistic manifestation of discontinuity and interruptions.
Topic discontinuity was subcategorized into pausing and repair (Chui, 2002), the
interruptions as in-turn or marginal.
Coding System
Topic discontinuity can be categorized according to the coding schemes below.
Based mainly on a number of previous studies, the researcher modified and combined
the categories below with examples extracted from the transcription.
1. Pausing: Common feature of natural speech in which gaps or hesitations appear
during production of utterances. Pause can be subcategorized as empty or filled
(Richard, Platt & Platt, 1998; Chui, 2001).
(a) Empty pauses refer to pausing without filled gaps in speech.
S: I have the so-called periodical.
T: Really? <P > What is a periodical?
S: More professional?
T: More professional, right.
(b) Filled pauses refer to pausing with non-lexical utterances like uh, hmm, um,
eh, and lexical utterances such as na for “and”, zhege for “this”, nage for
“that”, ranhou for “then”, and jiushi for “that is”, etc.
T: … “can not” is used for expressing strong doubt. <Then> why do you
suspect strongly? <That is > he is sure that it should be male. You have to
infer this way. <Then > what about number 2?
S: The answer is B.
2. Repair: Ways in which errors, unintended form, or misunderstanding are
corrected by speakers or others during conversation (Richards, Platt, & Platt,
1998). In discourse analysis, the organization of repair can normally be divided
into self- and other-repair.
(a) Self repair refers to that self-initiated by the speaker in conversation.
T: Those specialists will help you spend more money. Help you spend
money, Yeah, Isn’t it ironic?...Do you see ironic? Right, so ironic, yes?
5
S: Ha, ha!
(b) Other repair refers to a repair made by other speaker(s) in conversation.
T: Did you find it? As you go out to the counter, the items were put there.
Wow, only ten dollars, so cheap. Everything for 10 dollars, be it candy or
chocolate on the checking counter, and they cost just 10 dollars.
[
]
S: That refers to when you pay at the counter of the 7-11, the little bamboo
baskets on the counter holding the items, Yes? You can’t help buying them,
can you?
3. Overlap: A phenomenon which occurs when two persons talk simultaneously at a
turn transition relevance point where both speakers have the right to complete
their respective utterances (Sacks, Schegloff & Jefferson, 1974; Lerner, 1989;
Rod & Ilana, 2008). Biq (1998) categorized these as: incomplete and complete.
(a) Complete overlaps occur when both utterances are completed with
neither speakers withdrawing or with both speakers withdrawing.
S: Teacher, isn’t the registration fee NT$1,100?
T: That’s right. The more advanced the level of the test, the more expensive
the fee. Because the number of test takers decreases for advanced levels,
while the personnel expenditure for marking the tests remains the same.
What can they do? Clearly, they have to charge higher and higher rates for
the advanced levels.
(b) Incomplete overlaps occur when one speaker insists on the completion
of the turn leading to the other speakers’ withdrawal.
T: …..but he is very smart, so we choose “although”, Option B. Why isn’t it
A? It says that he can get average scores because he is very clever, but it
doesn’t make sense. O.K., next one…
S: Participle construction is so difficult …
T: Participle construction? Oh, what should be the underlying form of it?
4. Interruption: The phenomenon occurs when a second speaker usurps another
speaker’s right to continue by taking the conversational floor in the absence of
any evidence that the other speaker intended to relinquish the turn (Bennett,
1981): i.e., projected to begin in the middle of a point in conversation that is in
no way a possible completion point for a turn. Based on Li (2006), interruptions
can be classified as controlling and non-controlling.
(a) Controlling interruption means when the interrupted speaker withdraws and
the interrupting speaker completes the turn.
T: Because it said shoppers will spend an extra dollar each minute, one
additional dollar for each additional minute. Therefore, you would spend
6
30 extra dollars in 30 minutes. Probably more than that, I would guess.
Like me, for example, I could sit down for a cup of coffee if I am tired,
and glance at a beautiful dress tagged NT$1,200, then I…
[
]
S: One minute for NT$1,200! Maybe more money!
T: Am I that easily influenced?
S: Yes, any piece of clothing sold in a department store starts at NT$1,000!
(b) Non-controlling interruption refers to the situation where the interrupted
speakers’ turn is not withdrawn.
S: But how could you buy it since it’s so expensive?
T: But I don’t find it expensive!
S: Won’t your husband scold you for that? You …
[
]
T: I can control myself; I have bought only two items of clothing in one
month!
S: Aha…your husband will be angry!
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Classroom Observation Results
The information obtained from the classroom observations will be presented first,
followed by interview data. Table 1 presents total instances of topic discontinuity for
each class. Combined with results of the three classes, a total of 18,042 occurrences
concerning topic discontinuity were identified. Pauses represented a plurality (8550),
followed by interruptions (3566) and repairs (3317). Repair had the lowest frequency
(2609). For total occurrences, Class A presents the greatest frequency of distribution,
Class C next, Class B the least. There are two possible explanations for the findings.
First, similar to results yielded by daily conversation (Chui, 2002), topic discontinuity
occurred frequently in the EFL senior high school classrooms. Second, contrary to the
common assumption that teacher authority dominates the conversation completely in
class students were often involved in the four markers causing discontinuity.
Table 1
Pause
Repair
Overall Occurrences of the TDMs in the Three Classes
Class A
(6 sessions)
Class B
(8 sessions)
Class C
(7 sessions)
Total
(21 sessions)
3526
(48.77%)
2174
(45.32%)
2850
(47.38%)
8550
(47.39%)
1
1194
(16.51%)
1017
(21.20%)
1106
(18.39%)
3317
(18.38%)
3
7
Rank
Overlap
1067
(14.76%)
Interruption 1443
(19.96%)
Total
7230
672
870
2609
(14.01%)
934
(19.47%)
4797
(14.46%)
1189
(19.77%)
6015
(14.46%)
3566
(19.76%)
18042
4
2
Table 2 shows frequency distribution of markers for each class divided by the total
number of observed sessions, since these differ among classes. Frequency of the four
markers display similar distributions across classes: pause with the highest, followed
by interruption, repair, and overlap. This indicates pause as the most prevalent marker
in EFL senior classrooms, which corresponds to Oliveira’s (2002) claim that pausing
is used frequently for emphasis in pedagogical situations.
Table 2
Average Frequency Distributions of the TDMs in the Three Classes
Class A
Class B
Class C
Total
Pause
Repair
Overlap
Interruption
271.8
199.0
177.8
587.7
127.1
84.0
407.1
158.0
124.3
1266.6
484.1
386.1
240.5
116.8
169.9
527.1
Total
1205.0
599.6
859.3
2663.9
Differences across the topic discontinuity markers were further analyzed (Table 3).
Only Classes A and B proved statistically significant in the four categories, while
Classes A and C as well as B and C showed no statistical significance at all. Moreover,
the post hoc test showed Class A outscoring Class B in frequency of distribution. As
for differences between classes, these could be attributed to students’ gender
differences. With the prevalence of communicative competence, recent studies have
revealed male and female speakers presenting noticeable differences in discourse
(Coates, 1993; 1996; Farris, 1998; Goddard & Mean, 2000). This study’s three
teachers were female, while the three classes were all-male, all-female, and co-ed,
respectively. This may explain why only Class A and Class B displayed statistically
significant differences.
Data collected and analyzed in this study supported previous findings. Cameron &
Coates’ (1987) research on significant connection between speaker sex and pausing,
found that women tended to pause more often, explained by the fact that they allow
for topic discontinuance by pausing, while men do not. A female teacher in the
all-female Class B would clearly give rise to an increase in the occurrence of pauses.
In addition, Juliane and Andrea (2003) noted a key aspect of conversational analytic
work on repair: ‘to show how repair illustrates participants’ orientations towards the
8
basic turn-taking rules’. By extending this suggestion, it seems reasonable to infer that
repair involving gender trouble may show participants’ orientations toward
stereotypical understanding of gender. The findings in relation to interruptions align
with previous research, which pointed out that males tend to interrupt in conversation
and alter the topic of other speakers (Deuchar, 1987; Karakowsy, McBey & Miller,
2004). More often than not, male speakers would like to control the topic and
dominate interaction, such that men interrupted women much more than vice versa.
Results of this study also conform to previous research which showed that males
produced more repairs in speech (Pica, Holliday, Lewis, Berducci & et al, 1991;
Sunderland, 2000, 2002; Swann & Graddol, 1995).
Table 3
Post Hoc Test Results for the TDMs in the Three Classes
F
Pause
7.48*
Repair
3.26
Overlap
3.12*
Interruption
4.15*
Note: * p＜ .05 , ** p＜ .001
p-value
Post hoc
0.000 **
0.038*
0.045*
0.001**
A>B
A>B
A>B
A>B
In Tables 4 to 5, frequency of empty pauses outnumbered filled pauses across these
classes. Class A is the only one in which empty and filled pauses manifested a
statistically significant difference; others showed no such difference in either
subcategory. There may be two possible explanations for this. The range of empty
pauses is as wide as it is long as a speaker stops for a moment or longer up to 10
seconds (Chui, 2002), meaning that frequency distribution would accumulate more.
Class A consisted of all male students, who tended to yield comparatively more empty
pauses, and this result coincides with Butterworth (1980) and Rosenfield (1987).
Table 4
Frequency Distributions for Subcategorized Pauses in the Three Classes
Category
Subcategories
Class A
Class B
Class C
Pauses
Empty pause
Filled pause
2409
1117
1136
1038
1621
1229
Table 5
Post Hoc Test Results for Subcategorized Pauses in the Three Classes
Category
Subcategories
Class A
Class B
Class C
Pauses
Empty pause
401.5
142.0
231.6
Filled pause
|T|
186.2
129.8
175.6
5.38
0.30
1.39
p-value
0.000**
0.764
0.165
9
Note: * p＜ .05 , ** p＜ .001
Frequency distribution of repair is plotted in Tables 6 to 7. Class B demonstrated
significant differences in self- and other-repair; neither of the other classes did. These
results can again be attributed to gender-related factors. In terms of a sociolinguistic
perspective, females were found to be more eager to produce self-repair in interaction:
they express thoughtful concern and have harmonious relationships with other
speakers. Thus gender was considered a dominating factor in most self repairs (West
& Garcia, 1988). With the female teacher and all-female students, the self repair
utterances were significantly reinforced (Kasper, 1985).
Table 6
Frequency Distributions for Subcategorized Repairs in the Three Classes
Category
Subcategories
Class A
Class B
Class C
Repair
Self repair
Other repair
665
529
790
227
582
524
Table 7
Category
Post Hoc Test Results for Subcategorized Repairs in the Three Classes
Subcategories
Repair
Self repair
Other repair
|T|
p-value
Note: * p＜ .05 , ** p＜ .001
Class A
Class B
Class C
110.8
88.2
1.13
0.258
98.8
28.4
3.52
0.000**
83.1
74.9
0.41
0.682
In Tables 8 to 9, frequency of complete overlaps outnumbered incomplete overlaps
across these classes. Table 8 depicts overlap subcategories of frequency distribution
between classes. Findings indicate that Class A’s performance was statistically
significantly different in terms of complete and incomplete overlap. Classes B and C
showed no significant difference. A possible explanation might be the feature of an
all-male class. Male students tend to insist on a topic they initiate while the female
teacher is speaking, thus more complete overlap emerged (Itakura & Tsui, 2004).
Table 8
Frequency Distributions for Subcategorized Overlaps in the Three Classes
Category
Subcategories
Class A
Class B
Class C
Overlaps
Complete overlap
Incomplete overlap
699
368
453
219
454
416
Table 9
Post Hoc Test Results for Subcategorized Overlaps in the Three Classes
Category
Subcategories
Class A
Class B
Class C
Overlaps
Complete overlap
Incomplete overlap
116.5
61.3
56.6
27.4
64.9
59.4
10
|T|
p-value
Note: * p＜ .05 , ** p＜ .001
2.04
0.97
0.18
0.041*
0.332
0.857
Tables 10-11 identify interruption subcategories of frequency distribution. As in
the previous section, Class A demonstrated a statistically significant difference in the
(non-)controlling interruptions; Classes B and C had no such difference. Observed
data indicated male students cutting in female teachers’ speech with high frequency,
in addition to tending to hold the conversation topic and manage to alter the teachers’
topic to theirs. They tend to interrupt with their desired topic and make a teacher
cooperate, which corresponds to studies of Woods (1988) and Zimmerman & West
(1975).
Table 10 Frequency Distributions of Subcategorized Interruptions in the Three
Classes
Category
Subcategories
Interruption Controlling interruption
Non-controlling interruption
Class A
Class B
Class C
451
992
506
428
585
604
Table11 Post Hoc Test Results for Subcategorized Interruptions in the Three Classes
Category
Subcategories
Interruption Controlling interruption
Non-controlling interruption
|T|
p-value
Note: * p＜ .05 , ** p＜ .001
Class A
Class B
Class C
75.2
63.3
83.6
165.3
9.01
0.000**
53.5
0.98
0.327
86.3
0.27
0.787
Retrospective Interview Results
Interviews were conducted to collect information on perspectives of EFL senior
high school teachers of the four topic discontinuity markers. First of all, as to factors
making topics discontinue, all attributed these to repair. They reported, in common
with one another, that repairs occurred most and pause least frequently in their class.
Still, data gleaned from classroom observation showed a diametric opposite of
teachers’ perceptions. In fact, observed production of pauses pre-dominated the other
markers in causing discontinuity, while repair was comparatively less frequent.
Based on the clipped classroom observation information, each teacher participant
then reported retrospectively on the reasons why they performed two subcategories of
each four markers. Synthesizing their interview results, they regarded occurrence of
empty pauses causing topic discontinuity mostly when they were used either to take a
short break in a lecture or when waiting for replay of questions raised by the teacher.
11
Filled pauses occurred to cause topic discontinuity mostly when used to ensure that
students understood a teacher’s instructions and draw their attention to focal points
they emphasized. As for self-repair that made a topic discontinue, teachers reported
that a large majority of occurrences were intended to explain, exemplify, and even
expand the teaching materials. Other repair involved more students who tended to ask
questions and made proposals, which would break the topic continuity. When it comes
to both complete and incomplete overlaps in topic discontinuity, the teachers
identified that they occurred in similar situations. They attempted to please a teacher
by showing they were focusing attentively on what a teacher instructed. Students tend
to relate what a teacher says, to something unique or unexpected. Lastly, controlling
interruption that results in discontinuity was identified in three circumstances, all due
to disagreement of the topic content. Teachers cut in the students’ speech, the students
interrupt the teachers’ speech, and the students interrupt the other students.
Non-controlling interruption was performed to allow new information flow between
speakers other than the original topic; thus topic continuity would be impaired.
CONCLUSION
Among the markers, pauses occurred most frequently, followed by interruption,
overlap and repair. As for subcategories of markers, the most frequent were empty
pauses, with non-controlling interruption second in the all-male class. The all-female
class used empty pauses most frequently, followed by filled pauses. Female teachers’
discourse with female students led to more pauses than their discourse with males,
because females allow for topic discontinuance by pausing. The all-female class
tended to avoid interrupting female teachers in the classroom. Topics for females
typically involve developing trust and some form of connection with conversational
partners (e.g., Itakura, 2001; Tannen, 1990). Such characteristics generally make them
more responsive and considerate listeners than male conversationalists (e.g., Maltz &
Borker, 1982; Magolda, 1989). By contrast, male students tended to interrupt the
female teachers, displaying a desire to control topic and dominate interaction.
Conversation is more often used by male speakers to ascertain status or to
acquire/deliver information (e.g., Case, 1995; Nordenstam, 1992). Such patterns of
conversational behavior have been observed among men trying to dominate, direct, or
control conversations with women in public (e.g., Holmes, 1995). In addition,
teachers thought repairs occurred most often and that pauses were the least frequently
occurring mechanism in terms of topic discontinuity. In fact, there is a stark contrast
between actual performance in the classroom and their perceptions. All in all, the
gender- and culture-related issues revealed that the study provided significant findings
on topic discontinuity between female teachers and all-male, all-female, and co-ed
12
classes.
Educational Implications
Traditionally, EFL senior high school teachers were supposed to wield absolute
authority, especially in flow of speech. The findings of this study highlight the
importance of improved command of classroom speech based upon causes of the
conversational topic discontinuity. They may well choose to increase interaction, thus
discontinuity markers will inevitably occur to activate the atmosphere and encourage
participation. On the contrary, if they intend to develop their instructional purpose,
they have to maintain control of topics to avoid discontinuity makers from students to
distract or postpone the conversational schedule. It is thus difficult to strike a balance
between focus on smooth lecture, in which teachers usually dominate the topic, and
effective practice, which involves communicative activities between teachers and
students and/or between students.
Consequently, based on the findings of this study, classroom practice focusing on
the importance and effectiveness of skills and ability to control turn-taking, topic
dominance, interaction modes, etc. should be a primary concern for EFL teacher
training (e.g., Palmer, 1989; Wei, 1996). EFL teachers are expected to be aware of
topic shift and handle it carefully, managing topic continuity and discontinuity to
boost instructional effect, classroom atmosphere, and communication. In light of the
findings of culture and gender-related tendency or preference, course design and
curriculum development should incorporate the understanding of diverse attitudes and
strategies when teachers of different genders face students of both sexes. In this way,
the teaching and learning effect in classrooms can be facilitated and reinforced.
Suggestions for Further Studies
This study is limited to the gender distribution of teachers. With far fewer male
teachers at the senior high school stage, this practical difficulty results from a lack of
appropriate male teachers. The practical difficulty in finding three male English
teachers is not uncommon because English teachers in secondary education are
overwhelming female in the EFL context, especially in Eastern Asian countries.
Future studies should attempt to overcome this barrier and implement research
involving male teachers with similar backgrounds to the all-male, all-female, and
co-ed classes. Then the results can be analyzed in contrast with the female teachers to
aforementioned three types of classes. In this way, more phenomena regarding the
role of gender difference in the discontinuity in the EFL classrooms could be
identified.
REFERENCES
13
Andersen, G. (1998). The pragmatic marker like from a relevance-theoretic
perspective. In: A. H. Jucker & Y. Ziv (Eds.), Discourse markers: Descriptions
and theory (pp. 147-170). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Amfo, N. A. A. (2001). A relevance-theoretic study of some pragmatic markers in
Akan. Trondheim: Lingvstisk Institutt, NTNU.
Bennett, A. (1981). Interruptions and the interpretation of conversation. Discourse
process, 4, 171-188.
Bergmann, J. R. (1990). On the local sensitivity of conversation. In I. Marková & K.
Foppa (Eds.), The dynamics of dialogue (pp. 201–226). Hemel Hempstead:
Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Biq, Y. O. (1998). Overlap in Mandarin conversation. Proceedings of the Ninth North
American Conference of Chinese Linguistics, 2, 1-18. Los Angeles: University
of Southern California, GSIL Publications.
Butterworth, B. L. (1980). Evidence for pauses in speech. In B. L. Butterworth (Ed.),
Language production: Speech and talk (pp. 155-176). London: Academic Press.
Button, G.., & Casey, N. J. (1985). Topic nomination and pursuit. Human Studies, 8
(1), 355.
Chafe, W. (1987). Cognitive constraints on informatiaon flow. In R. Tomlin (Ed.),
Coherehce and grounding in discourse (pp. 21–52). Amsterdam: John
Benjamins.
Chafe, W. (1994). Discourse, consciousness and time: The flow and displacement of
conscious experience in speaking and writing. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
Cameron, D., & Coates, J. (1987). Some problems in the sociolinguistic explanation
of sex differences. In J. Coates and D. Cameron eds., Women in their speech
communities. London and New York: Longman, 13-26.
Case, S. S. (1995). Gender, language and the professions: recognition of
wide-verbal-repertoire speech. Studies in the Linguistic Sciences, 25(2),
149-192.
Chen, G. T. (1983). The ba construction: A topic and comment approach. Journal of the
Chinese Language Teachers Association, 18(1), 17-29.
Coates, J. (1993). Women, men and language : A sociolinguistics account of gender
differences in language. London: Longman.
Coates, J. (1996). Women Talk: conversation between women friends. Oxford:
Blackwell Publishers.
Chui, K. (2000). Discontinuity of conversational topics. In Y. C. Hsiao (Ed.),
Proceedings of the NCCU Conference on Faculty Linguistic Research Results
(pp. 173-199). Taipei: National Chengchi University.
14
Chui, K. (2001). Topic chain and grounding in Chinese discourse. Taipei: Crane
Publishing Co., Ltd.
Chui, K. (2002). Discontinuity of Conversational Topics. Concentric: Studies in
Literature and Linguistics. Taipei: National Taiwan Normal University.
Chui, K. (2003). Is the correlation between grounding and transitivity universal?
Studies in Language, 27(2), 221-244.
Coulthard, M. (1985). An introduction to discourse analysis. Burnt Mill, Harlow:
Longman.
Farris, C. S. (1998). Cross-sex conflict and the discursive production of gender in a
Chinese preschool in Taiwan. Journal of Pragmatics, 3, 539-568.
Foppa, K. (1990). Topic progression and intention. In I. Markov & K. Foppa (Eds.),
The dynamics of dialogue (pp. 178–200). Hemel Hempstead: Harvester
Wheatsheaf.
Foster, S. (1983). Topic and the development of discourse structure. Volta Review,
85(5), 44-54.
Foster, S. H. (1986). Learning discourse topic management in the preschool years.
Journal of Child Language, 13(2), 231-250.
Fox, B. A., Hayashi, M., & Jasperson, R. (1996). Resources and repair: A
cross-linguistic study of syntax and repair. In E. Ochs, E. A. Schegloff, & S. A.
Thompson (Eds.), Interaction and grammar (pp.185-237). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Givón, T. (1983). Topic continuity in discourse: An introduction. In T. Givón (Ed.),
Topic continuity in discourse: A quantitative cross-language study. Amsterdam:
Benjamins.
Givón, T. (1993). Coherence in text, coherence in mind. Pragmatics and Cognition, 1,
171-227.
Goddard, A., & Mean, L. (2000). Language and gender. New York: Routlege.
Heyman, R. D. (1986). Formulating topic in the classroom. Discourse Processes, 9(1),
37-55.
Holmes, J. (1995). Women, Men and Politeness. London: Longman.
Itakura, H. (2001). Conversational dominance and gender: A study of Japanese
speakers in first and second language contexts. Pragmatics and Beyond,
Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Itakura, H., & Tsui, B.M. (2004). Gender and conversational dominance in Japanese
conversation. Language in Society, 33(2), 223-248.
Juliane, S., & Andrea, G. (2003). Repair in chats: A conversation analytic approach.
Research on language and social interaction, 36(3), 241-284.
15
Karakowsy, L., McBey, K., & Miller, D. (2004). Gender perceived competence and
power displays: Examining verbal interruptions in a group context. Small Group
Research, 35, 407-439.
Kasper, G. (1985). Repair in foreign language teaching. Studies in Second Language
Acquisition, 7, 200-215.
Lerner, G. H. (1989). Notes on overlap management in conversation: the case of
delayed completion. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 53, 167-177.
Levelt, W. J. M. (1983). Monitoring and self-repair in speech. Cognition, 14, 41-104.
Li, H. Z. (2006). Interruption and involvement in discourse: Can intercultural
interlocutors be trained? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the
International Communication Association, Dresden International Congress
Centre, Dresden, Germany Online.
Liu, M. C., & Chang, C. E. (2005). From frame to subframe: Collocational
asymmetry in Mandarin verbs of conversation. International Journal of
Computational Linguistics and Chinese Language Processing, 10(4), 431-444.
Magolda, M. B. (1989). Gender differences in cognitive development: An analysis of
cognitive complexity and learning styles. Journal of College Student
Development, 30, 213-220.
Maltz, D. N., & Borker, R.A. (1982). A cultural approach to male- female
miscommunication. In J. J. Gumperz (Ed.), Language and Social Identity (pp.
196–216). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Martinez-Marquez, J. A. (1989). Discourse Patterns in a Spanish Language Classroom:
Turns, Topics, and Tasks. The Humanities and Social Sciences, 50(2), 431-C.
Maynard, D. W., & Zimmerman, D. H. (1984). Topical talk, ritual and the social
organization of relationships. Social Psychology Quarterly, 47, 30-116.
Ng, S., & Bradac, J. (1993). Power in Language. Newbury Park: SAGE.
Nordenstam, K. (1992). Male and female conversational style. International Journal
of the Society of Language, 94, 75-98.
Oliveira, M. (2002). Pausing strategies as means of information processing narratives.
Proceeding of the International Conference on Speech Prosody,
Ain-en-Provence, 539-542.
Palmer, M. T. (1989). Controlling conversations: Turns, topics and interpersonal
control. Communication Monograph, 56, 1-18.
Pica, T., Holliday, L., Lewis, N., Berducci, D., & Newman, J. (1991). Language
learning through interaction. What role does gender play? Studies in Second
Language Acquisition, 13, 343–376.
Reboul, A., & Moeschler, J. (1997). Reductionism and contextualization in
pragmatics and discourse analysis. Linguistische Berichte, 8, 283-295.
16
Richards, J. C., Platt, J., & Platt, H. (1998). Longman dictionary of language teaching
& applied linguistics (English-Chinese). HK: Addison Wesley Longman China
Limited.
Rod, G., & Ilana, M. (2008). Post-start-up overlap and disattentiveness in talk in a
Garrwa community. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 30(3), 1-14.
Rosenfield, B. (1987). Pauses in oral and written narratives. Boston: Boston
University.
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the
organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50, 696-735.
Schiffrin, D. (1987). Discourse Markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Shei, C. C. (2005). Fixedness in genre-specific language and intercultural differences:
Comparing English and Chinese fire news corpora. International Journal of
Corpus Linguistics, 10(2), 199-225.
Sunderland, J. (2000). New understandings of gender and language classroom
research: Texts, teacher talk and student talk. Language teaching research, 4(2),
149 - 173.
Sunderland, J. (2002). Gender identity and discourse analysis: Theoretical and
empirical considerations. In L. Litosseliti & J. Sunderland (Eds.), Gender
identity and discourse analysis (pp. 1 - 39). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Swann, J., & Graddol, D. (1995). Feminising classroomtalk? In S. Mills (Ed.),
Language and gender: Interdisciplinary perspectives (pp. 135–148). London:
Longman.
Tannen, D. (1989). Talking voices: Repetition, dialogue and imagery in
conversational discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tannen, D. (1990). Gender differences in topical coherence: creating involvement in
best friends' talk. Discourse Process, 13, 73-90.
Tsao, F. F. (1979). A functional study of topic in Chinese: The first step towards
discourse analysis. Taipei: Student Publishing Co., Ltd.
Tsao, F. F. (1988). Topics and clause connectives in Chinese. Bulletin of the Institute
of History and Philology, Academia Sinica, 53(3), 695-737.
Tsao, F. F. (1990). Sentence and clause structure in Chinese: A functional perspective.
Taipei: Student Publishing Co., Ltd.
Tseng, S. C. (2006). Repairs in Mandarin conversation. Journal of Chinese Linguistics,
34(1), 80-120.
van Dijk, T. A., & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension. New
York: Academic Press.
17
van Dijk, T. A. (1981). Episodes as units of discourse analysis. In D. Tannen (Ed.),
Analyzing discourse: Text and talk (pp. 177-195). Georgetown: Georgetown
University Press.
Waltereit, R. (2002). Imperatives, interruption in conversation, and the rise of
discourse markers: A study of Italian guarda. Linguistics: An interdisciplinary
journal of the language sciences, 40 (5), 987-1010.
Wei, Y. B. (1996). A case study of the instructional strategies in EFL classrooms.
Unpublished master thesis, Changhua University of Education, Taiwan.
West, C., & Zimmerman, D. H. (1983). Small insults: a study of interruptions in
cross-sex conversations between unacquainted persons. In B. Thorne, C.
Kramarae, & N. Henley (Eds.), Language, gender & society (pp. 103-117), MA:
Newbury House.
West, C., & Garcia, A. (1988). Conversational shift work: A study of topical
transitions between women and men. Social Problems, 35(5), 551–575.
Woods, N. (1988). Talking shop: Sex and status as determinants of floor appointment
in a work setting. In J. Coatesand & D. Cameron (Eds.), Women in their speech
communities (pp. 141–157). London: Longman.
Zelinsky-Wibbelt, C. (2003). Review of discourse and the continuity of reference. In
E. Shay (Ed.), Studies in language, 27(1), 197-200.
Zimmerman, D. H., & West, C. (1975). Sex roles, interruptions and silences in
conversations. In B. Thorne & N. Henley (Eds.), Language and gender:
Differences in dominance (pp. 105-129). Rowley MA: Newbury.
18