CTL3799H
Yudi Xiao
Student ID: 1001322348
Prof. Jeff Bale
Article Response I
A Review of Non-native/Non-native Conversations: A Model for
Negotiation of Meaning by Varonis & Gass (1985)
Introduction
This article clearly identified and specifically focused on how conversations
happen between non-native speakers in which the NNS/NNS discourse involves the
“negotiation of meaning” (1985, p71).Since the previous conducted studies are
basically focused on the difficulty of understandings between native speakers and
non-native speakers, the authors shift their attention to a more frequent and complex
NNS/NNS discourse, which to some extent compensate the insufficient research
domain. The set up of the “non-understanding routines” are defined as the “exchanges
in which there is some overt indication that understanding between participants has
not been complete” (1985, p73). In other words, it could be either “a
misunderstanding, no understanding, or incomplete understanding” (1985, p73).
Literature Review
Initiated from the “interactions between native speakers and non-native speakers
and in support of the importance of interactions for L2 acquisition” (Long, 1983a), the
authors departed from it and transferred their attention into the “nature of
conversational interactions between non-native speakers” (1985, p71), which majored
the issue from the native speakers into the non-native speakers and broadened a new
topic.
Methods & Research Design
In order to identify the “non-understanding routines”, the authors specifically
provided a model with four main modes with various functions. The participant
members were “students at the English Language Institute of The University of
Michigan. The members of these dyads were of the same sex (seven male pairs and
seven female pairs). All were native speakers of either Spanish or Japanese” (1985,
p72). The gathered data based on the author’s examples (audio- taped in an informal
conversations with no instructions) has been systematically analyzed by the model of
“trigger-resolution” and the extended model for which the conversation contains
multiple layers of “trigger-resolution”. The numerous discourses expose the
“complexities involved in non-understanding routines”, which the negotiation is not
only lengthy, but also involves multiple embeddings” (1985, p78). By giving detailed
and specific explanations, the author depicts how the model of “trigger-resolution”
works with the “negotiation of meaning” in NNS/NNS conversations. The adequate
selected excerpts from the data clearly addressed the implications at the beginning of
the entire research.
Findings
By establishing the well-organized data base and calculating the statistics of
“pushdown routines” (1985, p83), the author further analyzed the results that the
“non-understanding routines” requires more time of negotiation than the native
speakers, which involves more efforts in resolution of comprehension. This quantitive
approach summarized the key issue that more shared background the interlocutors
have, less complex the dealing of meaning is. It was also suggested that non-native
speakers are tend to be less confident when interact with the discourse especially
when little progress is made in the “negotiation of meaning”. Besides, it was also
carefully reminded in the article that the inadequate language proficiency and
discouragement of learning may also affect the learners’ achievement. Nevertheless,
the findings do not suggest many reflections and ideas from the participants, which
limit the ethic and responsibility in academy. Besides, the published date of this
article is nearly thirty years ago and part of the statistics could be out-of-date and need
to be renewed.
Discussions & Conclusions
The authors summarized the conclusions clearly and briefly reemphasizing the
main purpose and findings in the entire research. Also it pointed out that the
possibilities of further research that “the discourse situations that involved in
non-native speakers and the demands made upon the interlocutors to the quantity and
complexity of negations in NNS/NNS discourse” (1985, p87).
Regarding the entire research, the results and analysis may also apply to two
distinctive aspects: “the described conversations among native speaker interlocutors
where a lack of shared background, linguistic or cultural, or a lack of shared values”
(1985, p86); “a response with rising intonation that is used in psychotherapy to focus
a patients’ attention on an aspect of the discourse which may reflect a source of
problem for the patient” (1985, p86). These two highlight aspects reflect and echo the
research to an innovative and sustainable perspective (both linguistic and
psychological), which to an extent enlightened the further researchers to broaden and
deepen the studies.
Affect
This research focuses on the NNS/NNS conversations issue, which reflects the
second language teaching classroom in practice. The second language teacher as an
instructor has the responsibility to guide and assist the learning of the students.
However, the teacher sometimes is also a non-native speaker of the teaching language
as well (e.g. Chinese teacher teaches English as the second language), which increases
the difficulty of communication during the discourse in class. Therefore, with the
assistance and the application of “non-understanding routines” and the approach of
“negotiate of meaning”, teachers are able to explain and to teach so that to be more
explicit and transparent. The teacher or instructor may have to shift their position and
to consider as students so that to build up a common and shared value and background.
This empirical research helps to identify and develop the strategies in teaching tasks,
which makes the conversation and procedure of learning and teaching more effective
and productive.
Reference:
1. Varonis, E., & Gass, S. (1985). Non-native/non-native conversations: A model for
negotiation of meaning.” Applied Linguistics, 6, 71–90.
2. Michael H. Long (1983). Linguistic and Conversational Adjustments to
Non-Native Speakers. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 5, pp 177-193.