Teacher Talk discourse analysis [10]
论文作者:佚名论文属性:短文 essay登出时间:2009-04-16编辑:黄丽樱点击率:36864
论文字数:7069论文编号:org200904161329433418语种:英语 English地区:中国价格:免费论文
关键词:Teacher Talkdiscourse analysiscontextclassroom interactioncommunicative features
ed to be like open questions and display questions like closed questions. However, sometimes referential questions may sound like closed questions and they are open questions in nature; at other times there may be display questions which seem to be closed questions rather than open questions in nature. Just as White took the following for example (1991):
T: How long have you worn glasses?
S: I have worn these glasses for about six years.
T: Very good. The same glasses?
The questions in the above example which are relevant to student's own experiences and unknown to the teacher can be referential, but on other hand, these questions are also used to get students to practice the grammar structure, and can thus turn out to be display questions. Taking, into consideration that whether questions are referential or display; open or closed, is a relative matter, teachers should manage to design referential or open questions; or switch from display or closed questions to referential or open ones. Also it should be realized that it is of importance for teachers to focus on classroom communication (Wang Ymquan, 1999).
Another aspect of TQ is related to the nature of communication. Richard Cullen points out that teachers can attach the property of communicating to display or closed questions which are non-communicating outside class (1998). Below is my example to demonstrate Richard’s opinion:
T: Well, who can give me a name of a great writer in the English-speaking world?
S 1: Charles Dichens
T: Charles Dichens. OK. What novels are we studying from Charles Dichens this year?
S2: A Tale of Two Cities.
T: All right. We say that Dichens is a writer. Who can give me another name for the word “writer”... more specialized term for the word “writer”?
S3: Shakespeare.
T: Er...Um... That’s not what 1 want. Shakespeare is a great writer too, but I want…Yes?
S4: Novelist?
T: A novelist. Yes, that’s what I want. So we have the word “novel”. (Write on the blackboard) We say that A Tale of Two Cities is a...?
S5: Novel.
T: A novel. Right. And the writer of A Tale of Two Cities is a...?
S6: Novelist.
At first look, the above discourse seems to be non-communicating because display questions are used here, and the teaching aim to teach the new word “novelist”, is carried out by non-communicating means. However, the process of this teaching activity implies the nature of communication, and teacher’s feedback is focused on content rather than form.
From the above, we can draw the conclusion that enlarging the communicating aspects in class interaction is beneficial in developing students’ communicative competence and thus contributes to second language acquisition.
(2) Correction of Mistakes in Teacher Talk
The view teacher and students hold on ‘mistakes’ seems to determine what they do with mistakes, the correction of mistakes, and their learning of the language in general. A rather traditional view of mistakes will be that teachers consider mistakes to be an erring from students’ side which should be corrected immediately and exhaustively. They consider errors something to be avoided, something “wrong” or “bad”. Consequently, students learn from them that making mistakes is a necessary evil. With this viewpoint of mistakes, teachers tend to stress accuracy instead of on fluency. But a much more developmental view on of mistakes will be to treat mistakes as the development of language skills and learning steps (Julian Edge, 1989) t
本论文由英语论文网提供整理,提供论文代写,英语论文代写,代写论文,代写英语论文,代写留学生论文,代写英文论文,留学生论文代写相关核心关键词搜索。