A Comparative Analysis of Casual Conversation and Institutional Talk

派语肯●文招研究A Comparative Analysis of CasualConversation and Institutional Talk王柯芦(乐山师范学院外国语学院，四川乐山614000)Abstract: This article reflects on the process of transcribing spoken interaction and makes acomparative analysis of two different varieties of spoken interaction (casual conver-sation and institutional talk). By doing so, it reveals how the different purposes ofspeech result in their distinctive characteristics, and shows how language is struc-tured to construct ideational meanings (Field) and interpersonal meanings (Tenor)that define each context.Key words: transcription; comparative analysis; casual conversation; institutional talk|[中图分类 号] H030| [文献标识码] A[文章编号] 1006-2831 (2014)02-0139-9 doi:10.3969/j.issn. 1006-2831.2014.01 .0371. Introductionin particular makes salient their distinctiveTranscription is a valuable tool to“freeze-linguistic and non-linguistic features, showingframe a moment"(Rex & Schiller, 2009: 10).how these choices enact different social rightsIt offers“previously invisible choices" (Rex &and obligations of each role of the interactants.Schiller, 2009: 10) to probe into conversations,In addition， a close examination of thewhich would otherwise be evanescent in itscharacteristics of the two types of interactionoriginal form. Transcription examines bothhelps reveal the different purposes ofhow interactants employ different grammatical,interaction, as“the linguistic forms and patternslexical, discourse-organizational, prosodic, andof interaction between the teacher and studentsparalinguistic features to negotiate meaningswill be linked in some way to the pedagogicaland achieve particular purposes in differentpurposes which the teacher introduces ”domains of life, and how the interpersonal(Seedhouse，1996: 21)，while casual talkrelationship is established, maintained orusually is not for a certain end, but sustainingchanged through the conversation. Despite theinterpersonal relationship.great value of transcription, it is not a faithfulThis article is based on the transcription ofor objective way in which talk can be written.a casual conversation and an institutional talk.Influenced by the purpose of transcribing,The casual talk is recorded when three friendspersonal language ideology, and the tensionare chatting on campus. The participantsbetween readability and accuracy, transcribersinclude one male native speaker (Dan) and twomay have different decisions in "what tofemale non-native speakers (Karen and Helen),transcribe and in how much detail" (Eggins,whose English proficiency is high and near2000: 148). Therefore, transcription itself is anativ中国煤化工an episode of akind of interpretation and representation (Green,tutorigiven to fourth-Franquiz & Dixon, 1997). A comparison ofyear:TYHCNMHGPore. A reflectioninstitutional talk with casual conversation wouldon the process of transcribing constitutes收稿日期: 2013-12-14; 修改稿: 2013-12-24Crazy English Teachers139疯狂英语教师版2014年第1期(2月号)the first part of the article, mainly focusing onalone are far from enough to reveal the hiddenhow the purposes of transcription affect themeaning and interpersonal relationship inauthor's transcribing process; then a detailedinteraction. Compared with the initial transcriptcomparative analysis of the casual conversation(Excerpt 1), stress in the final transcript (Excerptand teacher-and-student talk follows, showing1) of the same segment helps construct thehow their distinctive interactional purposescontent of interaction by highlighting someare enacted. However, characteristics andissues. The stressed and elongated wordpurposes of the two talks cannot be generalized"lo:t”highlights the amount of Karen's cry,to all casual conversations and classroomthe stressed phrase "felt sad" highlightstalks because transcription captures only oneKaren's sorrowful psychological state, and theinstance of each type of speech on the onestressed word "first" highlights how long thishand, and the recorded classroom talk is juststate has lasted. Thus, the final transcript witha sub-variety (seminar) of teacher-and-studentstress is better at showing Karen's reactiontalk in the educational setting on the otherto her husband's leaving. Stress also helpshand.represent participants' attitudes and uncoverthe interpersonal relationship: Dan's elongation2. Reflection of the transcribingof the exclamation“oh::" indicates his sympathytowards Karen; and Helen's purposefulprocessTranscription is an effective way tostressing and elongating the words "ba::ck" and"bring into focus the characteristics of spoken“cry:" at the end of her turns suggests that shediscourse, which are surprisingly obscure toseems to know more than what Karen is sayingmost people" (Cameron, 2001: 33). In otherand she is inviting more explanation, whichwords, analysts' attention is constantly drawndisplays an intimate relationship with Karen.Turn |Initial TranscriptFinal Transcriptto particular characteristics of spoken discourseduring transcribing, and this enables them to20| K: [and then] he returned to | K: [and then] he returnednotice what they might have neglected in theChina.to China.21 H: And he cried she cried.H: And he cried she cried.interaction, thus opening for them opportunities22 D:Oh.D: Oh::to see how one can communicate with others23 |H: Alot.H: Alo:. (laughter))more productively and get things done more24|K:NonotalotjustononthatK:Nonotalo:tjuston;| day when | was in the airport. on tha day when I was insmoothly. However, it is generally agreed thatthe airport.transcription cannot faithfully reproduce every25| H: And then later when you H: And then later whenaspect of talk (Eggins, 2000; Green, Franquizgot backyou gotba.;ck& Dixon, 1997; Roberts, 1997). It is possible for26 K: No, I didn't cry.K: No I didn't cry.a transcript to be delicate in one way but not27| H: You you didn't cry.H: You you didn't gy::=28|K:Ifeltsad.K:= | fltsad.in another (Eggins, 2000). For example, one29| H: Physically yeah you felt H: Physically yeah youtranscript might be very delicate in showingyou're crying inside.felt you're crying inside. =exact points of overlap, but much less delicate30| K: In the first several days.K:= In the [first severaldays.]in capturing paralinguistic information. Thus,H: (lughter]the transcriber needs to decide what degree ofExcerpt 1delicacy in what areas is necessary dependingon the analytic purpose.中国煤化工ption2.1 Stress in the transcriptionDYHCNMHGThe inclusion of stress in the author's. L auyIlI,如o a allyiu1 mon-linguistictranscription tries to demonstrate that wordsbehavior, helps contextualize interaction andconstruct the' Tenor. In the initial transcript,140 Crazy English TeachersKaren and Helen appear to be arguing about2.3 Pauses in transcriptionKaren's reaction to her temporary separationPauses are employed in the author'swith her husband, with Helen interrogatingtranscription to show the different purposesKaren, and Karen defending for herself. Theof the casual conversation and teacher-and-impression might be that Karen and Helen arestudent talk. While no pauses are timed in thenot on good terms with each other. However,casual conversation, pauses longer than 1.35in the final transcript, Helen's talking of Karen'sseconds are timed in the teacher-and-studentcry is accompanied by laughter (turn 23), andtalk. The pauses in the casual conversationagain her reaction to Karen's self-defense isare rather short and few, while the number andlaughter without words (turn 31). She seems tothe length of the pauses in the teacher-and-be mocking at Karen's immaturity as a newly-student talk are especially conspicuous. In themarried woman without worrying that Karencasual conversation, there are pauses whenmight get embarrassed. Laughter in the finalDan doesn't know how to express his idea astranscript contextualizes the merry and relaxingshown in Excerpt 3, and when he looks like toatmosphere of the casual conversation, andbe wondering the appropriateness of the wordhelps reveal the intimate relationship and equal“resolve”as shown in Excerpt 4. The limitedsocial status between Karen and Helen.number of pauses in casual conversation .The contextualizing effect of laughteris related to its nature and purpose. Casualis also presented in the teacher-and-studentconversation is usually fluid and goes at atalk. Reading through Excerpt 2, a segmentfaster pace than the classroom talk, because,of the teacher-and- student talk, without thefirst of all, its purpose is not for any deeplaughter we might simply understand theunderstanding but exchanging information,reason why the teacher asks the student toadditionally, if any misunderstanding comes out,repeat her answer as the student speaking notinteractants could cut in at any time to requireoud enough. However, the student's laugherclarification or further explanation.seems to tell us that she speaks in low voice|D: So you think it's an individual thing because I wonderbecause she thinks the answer sounds simple36 er (.) the er this is a very big generalization I'm stualizingand childish; then the teacher's laughter seemsuture...to suggest that the answer is really simpleExcerpt 3and out of expectation, but it is just this simpleinstruction that is exactly what is needed in realD: Who just seem to have a bit more resolve and a bitteaching practice. In this sense, the laughtercol more er (.) yeah there seems to be very great sense of59does promote understanding of the context ofresolve but again I'm I'm talking in [such stereotypes it'scrazy.]interaction.TurnTeacher-and-student talkExcerpt 437 T: ..Now if you were a class of P1 students (.) what sortOn the contrary, for the purpose ofof thing should | say to you.academic instruction, the teacher must resort38 | L8: (Laughing while speaking in low voice)) Do notto various devices, including pauses, to maketouch the paper.39 T: God. Say say so that we can all hear. I'm sure you'resure that students understand and follow him| absolutely right.all the time. Excerpt 5 shows that the teacher0| L8: Do not touch the paper.purp中国煤化工fore the lesson41 . . T: Do not touch the paper. Thank you! (laughter) Right!Because with young students if you're gonna it's gonnamoveYHC N M H Gnnouncing thattake a itte while to distribute materials to all of them ()students will learn more about Adam Pigso what some of them are gonna start doing.story on another day, the teacher is indicatingExcerpt 2Crazy English Teachers141疯狂英语教师版2014年第1期(2月号)that they have finished one task and willtranscription is due to two reasons: first of all,immediately move to the next. Then the longthis feature of rhythm is not salient in the restpause allows students time to digest what haspart of the teacher-and-student talk; secondly,been learned and get ready for what is coming.the focus of the author's comparative study isOr the teacher may pause so that students canon the differences between casual conversationhave some time thinking about the questionsand classroom talk and how these distinctivegiven by the teacher, which seems to be thefeatures serve their own social purposecase in Excerpt 6. Sometimes, teachers pauserather than simply displaying every detail into achieve special pedagogical effect, which isthe speech.Though not a faithful or objectiveusually emergent. For example, in Excerpt 7representation due to selection of certainthe teacher deliberately pauses a short whileaspects with more or less details, the author'sinstead of announcing the end of the short storytranscription tries to represent the importantimmediately after he finishes reading the storylinguistic and non-linguistic features which arepossibly because he wants to amuse studentsuseful for the analytic goal.and, what is more important, remind studentsthat the seemingly short story is long enough3. Analysis of casual conversationfor primary one students.and institutional talkT: = And now much as you want to learn more about himUnlike classroom talk, which is“for the19|maybe on another day. (utting down the story book on theinstitutional purpose of learning" (Seedhouse,desk) (6.50) Do you wanna check your eferent listeningskills?1996: 23)，causal talk, most of the time, issimply for the sake of talking itself (Eggins,Excerpt 52000). A comparative analysis of ordinary,spontaneous interactions and classroom talkallows us to see not only how the differentmanagement and erganization by the teachers you wereobserving (.) what sort of things did they do. (5.98) somepurposes of the two types of speech result instudents are laughing)) If they're gonna get the class to dotheir distinctive characteristics, but also howsomething active, how did they organize it what did theylanguage is structured to construct ideationalmeanings (Field) and interpersonal meaningsExcerpt 6(Tenor) that define each context. Unable tocover every difference, it focuses on only threeT: ..And she gives Adam Pig and Lisa a big hug. (2.64)major aspects- -micro interactional features, theThat's it that's the end.organizational structure, and stability of Field5 LL: (lughter))and Tenor.Excerpt 73.1 Micro interactional features:Spontaneity phenomena2.4 Limitations of the transcriptionAs two varieties of spoken discourse,Admittedly, the author's transcription is anboth the everyday casual conversation andimperfect record of taped speech. Rhythm, forclassroom teacher-and-student talk containexample, is not represented in transcript of thespontaneity phenomena, like repetition andteacher-and-student talk. When the teacher ishesitation with examples given in Table 1.reading Adam Pig story to the student teachers,Neverthe中国煤化工two features .partially modeling how they can read this kindin the catMHCNMHGesthatintheof story to children, he pays attention to theteacher-and-student talk in the transcripts andrhythm. However, not marking it out in thethroughout the whole stretches of discourse,142 Crazy English Teacherswhich suggests that classroom talk might bedifferent social rights and obligations of eachmore carefully planned and processed, whilerole (Eggins, 2000). A close examinationcasual conversation is more spontaneous. Whatof the mood choices helps to display theiris interesting is that fillers only appear in theinterpersonal relationship in terms of power andcasual conversation. Fillers allow speakers timestatus.to think about what to say next or modify what. In the casual conversation interactantshas been said in the rapid flow of speech. Foruse only declaratives and interrogatives,instance, in the excerpted casual conversationsuggesting an equal status among them, whichbelow, Dan adopts“you know",“what may beis in accordance with Eggins' observation thatsay”and "like" when he tentatively expressescausal talk is often based on social equalitythe idea that Chinese don't cry as much as(2000). However, probing into certain part ofAustralians on trivial matters. Fillers enable himthe conversation, one will find that interactants'to think about how to express himself, and atsocial status is not stable throughout the wholethe same time soften the assertiveness of histalk but constantly negotiated. Excerpt 8 isstatement as it sounds a bit general, just ascentered on Karen's wedding and honeymoon,Dan acknowledges later in the conversation.which means Karen holds the neededSpontaneityCausal conversationTeacher-and-studentinformation for the exchange to prolong. Dan'sphenomenatalkinterrogative“How was your wedding" initiates57 D: Probably no 17 T: Start small andthe topic; then “Oh is he?" either encouragesprobably more Chinese so if ifthey cope withHelen to say more or invites Karen to clariftyRepetition| people | know I've | this very quickly andthe truth, thus prolonging the conversation; andknown over these years.| easily, great!finally“Do you have a photo you can't show(turm)me yeah?" continues engaging Karen and36 D: So you think|33 ...Er (1.33) in |Helen in the conversation. By responding toit's an individual thing keeping them simple,Hesitation| because | wonder er () what sort of thingDan's interrogatives, Karen provides necessarythe er this is a very big | must you () sayfirst.information in the mood of declarative for thegeneralization...conversation to move on. In this episode Karen36 D: ..t I'm gettingtakes a higher status than Dan and Helen as anthe impression thatinformation-provider.Chinese don't cry you| know all the thingslike that as much asFillerswhat may be sayerAustralians would forinstance like the ideayou cried coz yourhusband had to gobacTable 13.2 Micro interactional features: MoodchoiceMood is one of the grammatical resources中国煤化工for expressing interpersonal meanings. MoodYHCNMHGchoice is related to the cultural expectationfor a particular social role, and it enacts theCrazy English Teachers143疯狂英语教师版2014年第1期(2月号)indicates that the teacher has greater social1 |D: How was your wedding?! | K: Er actually we we didn't want a wedding party and wepower than students, which just meets theust er invited our (.) families to get together and [had a bigexpectation of the local culture that teachersmeal.assume a higher position promised by his|D:[That's beautiful.]expertise.|K: And we went to Bali [for our] =3.3 Micro interactional features:|6 |K:= honeymoon yeah. .Appraisal choiceD: That's really special.8 | K: (laughter) And [my husband]In casual conversation people are likely to| H:[You don't know] how husband how handsomeexpress personal attitudes with appraisal wordsher husband is. (laughter)but tend to act in a restrained, non- attitudinal10D:Ohishe?way in institutional contexts (Eggins, 2000).11 H: (laughter) Yes.12 | D: Do you have a photo you can't show me yeah.The interactants in the casual conversation and13| K: 11 have his photo yeah I'm in my phone (pointing to theteacher-and-student talk the author observedphone on the table and the phone is used as a recorder atdisplay the same features. Table 2, in whichappraisals are in bold, displays the use of14 | H: [Later]15 D: [Yeah] OK.appraisal words in the casual talk to express16 | K: [Later] later Ill [show you.]feelings, like “I felt sad", to make evaluation of17| D:[Yeah yeah] let's have a look at your handsomebehaviors, like "it's crazy", and also to assesshusband.the value of things as in“Yeah it's just the stupidExcerpt 8stereotype". The high affective involvement, inIn the teacher-and-student talk, theother words, the presence of these appraisalteacher and students take the same numberwords, suggests a close relationship and equalof turns, but students' turns are contributedstatus among interactants, as they feel freeby more than seven students (sometimes ato reveal their personal feelings and attitudes.groups of students answer simultaneously inWhile the relative absence of appraisal in theone turn). In addition, the teacher produces farteacher-and-student talk might be explainedmore clauses, most of which are full clauses,in the way that this enables the teacher andthan students. In other words, the teacherstudents to establish a detached relationship,dominates the classroom talk, doing more worknot showing much affiliation with each other,to initiate and prolong exchanges, while theso that it is useful to maintain the teacher'sstudents just play a responsive role. This doesauthority.not suggest the teacher is in a low status to|3 D: [That's beautiful.]“serve”students, on the contrary, the teacherD: That's reallyspecial.has the obligation to transmit knowledge byH: [You don't know] how husband how handsome herinitiating more talk. Another sharp contrasthusband is. (laughter)between teacher talk and student talk in this28 |K:= | fltsad.classroom is that the teacher uses declaratives,full interrogatives, and imperatives, but students|39 | H:= Ithought Westerners are more rational.only use declaratives. Interrogatives like "how| 47 |D: Yeah [t's just the stupid stereotype] =did they organize it what did they do" are| 48 | H: [that Eastern peoplere more sentimental. ]mainly used to initiate students' responses, andD: W中国煤化工。;solve and a bitimperatives such as“But remember this is for| 59。more1HCNMHGgreatsenseofprimary one”and“Start small" are to remindresolve but again I'm I'm talkIng In |such stereotypes it'sstudents some important points. This contrastcrazy.Table 2144 Crazy English Teachers3.4 Organizational structure: Turn-cutting-ins initiated by any interactant indicatestakingthe relative equality among them.Controlled by different interactional45 K: You just (.) [assume it.]46 H:[And we think]contexts, turn-taking unfolds differently in casual47| D: Yeah [its just the stupid stereotype] =conversation and classroom talk, respectively48|H: [that Easterm people're more sentimental.]displaying a more dynamic structure and a .19| D: = Yeah so you see your stereotype clashes with [minediscernible orgranizational structure, differentanywayI =50[| think]degrees of participants rights, and more or less51| D: = So probably[both're (pretty isue)but]responsibility shared by interactants for the52 K:[It depends on] it depends on individual =progress of the discourse.53| D: = Sure [sure.]There is a competition for turns in the54| H:[You] got the stereotype from the movies about| China or the TVs?casual conversation, as evidenced by 1555 D: (sipping cffee) No no.overlaps between two interactants and 2Excerpt 9overlaps among three interactants in the3-minute transcript. It suggests the equalThe turn-taking in the classroom talkstatus among interactants, whose participationunfolds in a discernible IRF pattern: teacherrights are unrestricted and responsibility forinitiation，student response，and teacherthe managing the progress of the discourse isfeedback. As a typical university class, turn-almost equally shared.taking is organized by the teacher throughoutExcerpt 9 shows that three participantsthe whole classroom interaction, who doesalways rush to speak and they all contribute tomost of the talking and asks all the questions.the flow of the conversation. From turn 45 to 47,The teacher takes more responsibility inwhen Karen is seeking confirmation from Davidmonitoring the direction of the conversation,whether he just assumes a conception (it),and the students' participation rights, to aHelen cuts in to state her opinion that“And wecertain extent, rely on the teacher's initiation ofthink the Eastern people're more sentimental",questions, which suggests a hierarchical socialwhich happens to partly overlap with bothstatus between the teacher and students.Karen's (“assume it) and Dan's turn ("it's justWhen probing into the interaction, onethe stupid stereotype"). And this competitionwould find that the teacher tries to motivatefor turns appears again between turn 48 andstudents to talk and enlarge students'52: Karen tries to cut in ("I think") when Dan isparticipation by relating questions to students'still in the middle of responding to Helen ("Yeahown experiences. Most questions initiated byso you see your stereotype clashes with mineteachers (except those questions betweenanyway' "); after waiting for quite a short momentturn 7 and 17 are used to model askingand assuming that Dan has finished, Karenquestions when checking primary students'manages to cut in by saying "It depends onunderstanding of a short story) are somewhatit depends on individual", which immediatelyin between known-answer questions and open-gets Dan's response. Then turn 53 shows thatended questions. For example, in Excerpt 10,Helen once again cuts in to inquiry about Dan'salthough when the teacher asks the questionstereotypes when Danis responding to Karen.“how did they organize it what did they do", heIn this segment, Karen and Helen competesseem中国煤化工rmined answer,for turns to talk to Dan, while Dan successfullyhis q:fYHCNMH Gnts to draw oncopes with them, making the conversation gotheir own experlences (DY reminding them ofsmoothly and flow rapidly. The unexpectedtheir practicum with Dr. Salong) will possiblyCrazy English Teachers1 45疯狂英语教师版2014年第1期(2月号)illicit alternative answers. Thus，even theis around Karen's wedding and honeymoon;teacher is still powerful than students due to histurn 9 to 19 moves to Karen's husband; andexpertise, students are expected to take moreturn 20 to 31 shifts to Karen's reaction to theresponsibility and given more participationseparation with her husband; and the rest turnsrights in co-constructing the classroomfocus on the cultural difference in the matter ofinteraction when they are asked to bring theircrying between the Westerner and Easterner.own experiences into classroom talk.The high frequency of topic shift is caused by21| T: Ok before we do this, I'm gonna to askthe nature of casual talk, which is not intendedyou you were at practicum with Dr. Salongto fufill any particular purpose or meet certainend, but just for the sake of talk itself. Thoughyou notice about classroommanagementtopics shifts are rarely achieved discreetly orand organization by the teachers you wereobserving () what sort of things did they do.abruptly", because "interactants who may have(5.98) (some students are laughing)f they'retopics they want to move on to find ways ofgonna get the class to do something active,| Initiationconnecting up their topics to topics currentlyhow did they organize it what did they do.22 L6: They give instruction frst,Responsebeing discussed" (Eggins, 2000: 146), it is still23| T: Ehendifficult to predict where the talk will go. For24| L6: Before they start on the task.Continueexample, there is a large discrepancy from the25 T: Ok so they give instruction firstbefore Feedbackfirst topic to the last topic, and the transitionstarting on the task.Did the () that kind of things happening?Initiationis achieved through two initiations sponsored26| L: (Some students are nodding their heads| Responseby Helen, who brings about Karen's husband| and saying "yes" in low voice))in turns 9 and later moves to Karen's crying27| T: Heads nodding people saying yes....Feedbackover her husband's leaving in turn 21, whichExcerpt 9becomes the basis of the last topic on thecultural difference in crying. With regard to the3.5 Stability of Field and Tenor: Topic-initiator of topic shift, two topics are initiated byshiftHeidi as already discussed, and the other twoTopic-shift, what topics interactantsare shifted by Dan. That means, in principle,negotiate and who initiates a new topic, noteverybody is granted the same rights foronly shows the subject matter of the speech,topic shift, which again suggests a relativelybut also reveals whether the interpersonalequal status among the interactants in therelationship is stable or constantly negotiatedcasual conversation. However, this equality inthroughout the interaction. To compare thesocial power is not stable. As what has beentopic-shift of the casual conversation anddiscussed earlier, Karen takes a bit higherteacher-and-student talk, it is easy to find thatstatus than Dan and Helen as an information-the latter is more stable in Field and Tenor thanprovider between turn 1 and 17, but the restthe former.part of the interaction shows a more equalLike any other casual conversation, manystatus among the three interacatants.different topics are talked about in the author'sThe teacher- and-student talk does not shiftrecording, with only four topics in the transcript.topics that often as the casual conversation,Topic shift in the casual conversation has threeand this is largely due to its preset teachingcharacteristics: high frequency of topic shift,objective中国煤化工transcribedlimited predictability of the direction of theclassroos involved:conversation, and the equal chance for initiatinglistening:TYH.... " .心..ing students'CNMHGa new topic among interactants. Turn 1 to 8comprehension (turn 1 to 20), and how to146 Crazy English Teachersgive instructions to lower primary studentsmacro level shows how different choices made(turn 21 to 42). The first topic is to showby the casual conversation and teacher- and-student teachers one of the efferent listeningstudent talk enact their respective purpose andstrategies- -organizing, and the second topic isideational and interpersonal meanings.for the purpose of introducing another efferentThe comparative analysis is meaningfullistening strategy- identifying details, both ofnot only because it relates the distinctivewhich work together for the objective of thisfeatures of the two varieties of spokentutorial- student teachers would be able todiscourse with their purposes, but also becauseuse the strategies to develop lower primaryit may give some implication for languagestudents' efferent and discriminative listening.teaching at school. Even though a sheerThus, what topics to talk and in what sequencereplication of casual interaction of everydayare determined by the focused outcome of thelife in the classroom setting for a pedagogicalclass, and the topic shift shows a clear directionpurpose is impossible, institutional talk couldtowards that outcome. Both topic shifts arelearn something from casual conversation,initiated by the teacher with explicit linguisticfor example making students share moresignals. For example, the first topic is initiatedresponsibility for the progression of the talkby the question“So are you ready, to listen toand enlarging their participation rights anda short story"(turn 1)， explicitly showing whatopportunities. Eto do next; when the topic shifts to another,the teacher again uses explicit linguisticstructure“OK before we do this" as indicator,and then offers the question 'If they're gonnaReferencesget the class to do something active, how didCameron, D. Transcribing spoken discourse. In Working WithDiscourse[M]. London: Sage, 2001.they organize it what did they do' (turn 21) toEggins, S. Researching everyday talk. In L. Unsworth (Ed.).initiate a new topic. The teacher's dominanceResearching Language in Schools and Communities[M].of topic shift shows her authority and powerLondon: Casel, 2000.Green, J., Franquiz, M., & Dixon, C. The myth of objectiveover students, and this kind of interpersonaltranscript: Transcribing as a situated act[J]. TESOL Quarterly,relationship maintains throughout the classroom1997(31): 172-176.talk.Rex, L. & Schiller, L. "Reading" conversations, openingpossibilities. In L. Rex (Ed.). Using Discourse Analysis toImprove Classroom Interaction[M]. New York: Routledge,4. Conclusion2009.Transcription and the discourse analysisRoberts, C. The politics of transcription: Transcribing talk: Issuesbased on it work together to make theof representatin[J. TESOL Quarterly, 1997(31): 167-172.characteristics of two varieties of spokenSeedhouse, P. Classroom interaction: Possibilities andimssibilties[J]. ELT Joumal, 1996(50): 16-24.discourse become visible. Though transcriptionis not a faithful and objective representation ofthe interaction itself, it still manages to capturesuch essential elements as paralinguisticinformation and prosodic features thatcontribute to contextualizing the interactionand co-constructing interpersonal meanings.中国煤化工The transcription also displays the distinctiveMHCNMHGfeatures of the speech, based on which thesubsequent discourse analysis at the micro andCrazy English Teachers147