Yuqing Xiao
CTL3799H Second Language Classroom Research
Prof. Jeff. Bale
Jan 30, 2015
Article Response 1
A Review of Non-native/Non-native Conversations: A Model for
Negotiation of Meaning by Varonis & Gass (1985)
Opening Summary
The conversational interactions between Non-native speakers (NNS) are main
objects studied in the article Non-native/Non-native Conversations: A Model for
Negotiation of Meaning. Through the research, it finds that negotiation of meaning
happens most frequently in NNS-NNS conversations than other kinds of conversation
and meanwhile it use the non-understanding routines: Trigger-Resolution model to
analyze the negotiation of meaning in NNS-NNS conversations in order to help
people better understand it.
Introduction & Literature Review
Since this article is an empirical research essay which focuses on their own
experiment rather than collecting the existing research data or reviewing previous
literature, there are not so many literature reviews in this article. This article begins
with a very brief introduction of some previous research focuses in the field of NS-NS
and NS-NNS discourses. By reviewing a few of previous researches from other
scholars, the authors of this article attempt to extent their research to a new and
specific field: negotiation of meaning in NNS-NNS discourses.
Methods & Research Design
This article does not give a very clear statement on its research question but it
proposes the main research issue, “how conversations between non-native speakers
differ from those between native speakers on the one hand and between native
speakers and non-native speakers on the other hand” (Varonis & Gass, 1985, p.71).
In this research, there are 28 participants in NNS-NNS conversations, 8 in NS-NNS
conversations and 8 in NS-NS conversations. All conversations take place between
speakers who had not met each other before. From the article, we clearly know that
“All participants in NNS-NNS group are students from the English Language Institute
of The University of Michigan who are native speakers of either Spanish or Japanese”
The research data come from “the first five minutes of each conversation which are
audio-taped for analysis of instances of non-understanding during the conversations”
(Varonis & Gass, 1985, p.72).
Then after summarizing some features of NNS-NNS discourse, the
“Trigger-Resolution model for non-understanding” is proposed in this article, as the
fundamental rationale for the study (Varonis & Gass, 1985, p.74). The authors give a
detailed explanation on how the Trigger-Resolution model works in negotiation of
meanings in NNS-NNS conversations. Here some excerpts selected from the real
conversations are used as the examples in the explanation and the graph in page 80 is
used as an assistant both of which also helps a lot for me to understand the how the
model really works.
Findings
By using t-test procedures to compare the numbers of pushdown routines
(non-understanding routines) among NS-NS, NS-NNS and NNS-NNS conversations
taped from the data base in experiment, this article finally finds out that “NNS-NNS
pairs show the greatest incidence of the non-understanding routines and the greatest
amount of negotiation of meanings among those three kinds of pairs” (Varonis & Gass,
1985, p.83-84). Here the use of tables to show data of three kinds of pairs does not
provide a very clear result for readers because the readers may not be familiar with
the calculation method used in this article.
However, from the ethic perspective of a research this article does not bring to
many voices of the participants. From my own view, feedback from the participants
sometimes can reflect shortage or defect of the research which can help researchers to
improve their research in the future. Moreover lack of feedback from the participants
will also impact the application of research result in real life condition.
Discussions & Conclusions
In the conclusion part, authors briefly summarize their research and give a
conclusion that “communication between any two interlocutors is facilitated when
they share a common background, linguistic and otherwise” (Varonis & Gass, 1985,
p.86). This conclusion is reasonable and believable because it well matches the
findings that are drawn based on authentic research data. In this part, authors also
admit the limitation of this research: “this research only deals with the NNS-NNS
discourses in general but does not investigate the particular kinds of NNS-NNS
discourse” (Varonis & Gass, 1985, p.87). Finally they think that there still is a need of
further efforts on research of the NS-NS, NS-NNS and NNS-NNS discourses.
Effects
For my own part, this article is very attractive to me and it provides an evidence
to confirm the way I think about the differences among NS-NS, NS-NNS and
NNS-NNS conversations. Additionally, this article also inspires me to know more
about NNS-NNS discourses such as how gender factors affect the NNS-NNS
discourses.
Finally, I am also interested in the application of this research. If I have an
opportunity, I would like to study that how negotiation of meanings contributes to L2
learning. I also would like to use the Trigger-Resolution model to analyze discourses
among L2 learners in classroom.
REFERENCES
Varonis, E. M., & Gass, S. (1985). Non-native/Non-native conversations: A model for
negotiation of meaning. Applied Linguistics, 6(1), 71-90.
doi:10.1093/applin/6.1.71