Discourse Analysis of a Spoken Text Between an Art student and a Teacher
Name
Institution
Discourse Analysis of a Spoken Text Between an Art student and a Teacher
The 2-minute face to face conversation is between an art student and a teacher, talking about animals and animal behaviours in different situations. It involves a description of animal behaviours and their effect on humans. They describe how they feel or view the animals and the actions they take when the animals act in certain ways. It is more of a description, as the individuals take a longer time to explain a scenario while the other person listens. Politeness is evident as the participants give turns on the conversation and flow of words. The essay analyses the conversation by firs transcribing using the transcription symbols as shown in appendix 1. A transcription is a tool for identifying and describing the moment by moment unfolding of talk (Gardner, 2015). The data is then analysed using pragmatics and conversation analysis methods. The pragmatics consider maxims of conversation, performative sentences, and deixis, while the conversation analysis focuses on social actions such as describing, questioning and agreeing.
Methodology
An analysis of a conversation first needs transcription, which enables examination of the form of language used by the participants (Mazeland, 2006). The transcribed data in appendix 1 used transcription symbols to illustrate the flow of information. Pragmatics and conversation analysis approaches were chosen to analyse the conversation. The analysis assumes that it is only the maxims of conversation, performance sentences, and deixis pragmatics that are available in the conversation.
Nevertheless, there might be other pragmatics in the dialogue used but not identified in this analysis. Maxims of conversation, which requires a speaker to be informative in the conversation being made, maxim of relevance whereby conversation should stick to the topic, maxim of manner, relating to orderliness and behaviour, and lastly the maxim of quality that discourages unsupported claims. The use of presupposition involves sentences that assume to the second party before an answer is given. It assumes that the second party already knows the subject of conversation. It is a background knowledge necessary for conversation to be appropriate and understood by listener (Grundy, 2008). Presupposition has been used in the conversation to create logic in dialogue.
Performative sentences under the pragmatics approach will also be used to analyse this conversation. They are either affirmative or declarative. If the performance sentences could be constative in its force, then the grammatical form would be declarative, while if it is not compositionality considered, then the performance force could be attached to performance sentences to create meaning (Harnish, 2002). Performance features and context modify what is being conveyed by utterance, by either adding, modifying other words and excluding some messages in a conversation. This has been portrayed in the conversation between the teacher and the student’s understandings of animals. In using the deixis approach, which is reference to an object or person referring to situational context, the essay analyses the personalities included in the conversation by the two parties. Deixis expressions could be away from or toward the speaker and are in three categories, person, spatial and temporal deixis. Person deixis will be used, which localises an entity based on the speaker (Green, 2008). It directly concerns the relationship between the structure of language and the context in which they are used (Dylgjeri & Kazazi, 2013). Without a common frame in conversations, deixis will be impossible to understand.
The second approach is the conversation analysis, which aims to represent data in recordings, in ways that would preserve and reveal interactionally relevant elements of the dialogue (Bolden & Hepburn, 2018). This is used throughout the conversation to create meaning in the dialogue and information being passed. It identifies the connections that exist between the parties, based on their flow of words and intonation. The participants use the rising and falling intonations in their conversation to create the dialogue turns for each individual. The pauses, indicate the turn and insisting on points, while stressing on a certain word or sentences identifies the ideas to concentrate much on or which the speaker wanted to pass messages on. Analysis of turn-taking clarifies how a conversation is conducted and also gives an insight into the personal relationship of the parties in the dialogue (Wiemann & Knapp, 1975). After listening to the conversation and how the dialogue interchanges between the two parties, it becomes possible to illustrate the exchange of ideas in the description of the animals, this is also shown in the symbols used in the conversation in appendix 1 illustrating the pauses and agreeing to one another’s ideas.
Analysis
Conversation analysis demonstrates that practices are oriented by participants in the design of their talk, and in creating relevance from one another’s conduct (Drew, 2018). The conversation analysis and pragmatic could be blended to create a more meaningful dialogue. While pragmatics studies how contexts contribute to meaning, conversation analysis evaluates the signs, words and flow of sentences to create meaning. These two have to be considered for a successful dialogue analysis. Maxims of conversation in pragmatics are evident in the teacher-student conversation as they both have information passing to the other. The parties understand one another and could even respond or add information to create more sense. The flow of the information insinuates the relevance of topic, as each party speaks about animals and reactions to them. As the conversation starts with the student giving an experience of pigeons bathing, the teacher could respond by generalising that birds whack with their feathers in water and even adds another bird, which is the duck that creates a continuation of the conversation as each party speaks of the duck. Maxim explains regularity in a certain conversational behaviour concerning sticking to the topic (Chamedzky, 1992). The vocal conduct creates the relevance of the dialogue and an understanding between the parties.
This form of conversion is a discussion of animal behaviours. The maxim of manner is depicted in the conversation, as there are orders and no much of overlapping voices. This orderliness in the maxim of manner creates effective turn-taking, in that a person could respond to a conversation after the first one completes the sentence. The pauses are a way of allowing the second party to either add information, negate some, or support by agreeing to it. As the students narrate about the duck at the grandmother’s place, the teacher is listening as we hear the ‘mm-mmh’ sound, showing a continuity or agreeing to the statements. According to Grice’s conversational norms, ‘do not say what you believe is false’ (Fallis, 2012). The student gives stories about her grandmother and shows confidence in the voice that it is true and that it happened. The speaker’s honesty is encouraged, just as depicted in this conversation. The supported claims create the flow of the conversation and regulate the social structure (Koudenburg, Postmes & Gordijn, 2016). The maxims provide Genuity and justification of information in a conversation.
The teacher student conversation flows with responses that match the relevance of the topic. The maxim of relevance is depicted through the participants responses to information from the other. In line 5, as the teacher explains the behaviour of the ducks in water, the student easily relates to her grandmother’s experience with ducks. The response is relevant to the topic that was being discussed which is on ducks. To add on, as the student narrates her grandmother’s attitude because of her dog getting poisoned, the teacher responds by giving an example of Egypt where dogs are also poisoned if many and also in Canada whereby this activity is not allowed. According to Grice, the maxim of relevance requires a partner’s contribution to be appropriate to the needs at each stage of transition (Kleinke,2010). The participants do not ask questions but instead give there vies and expect the other party to either support or give their opinion on the same subject. Maxim of relevance allows conversations to continue, as relevant information gives the morale to continue conversing.
Line 40 presents a performative sentence as well as maxim of quality as the student gives the example of her grandmother on the issue of the ducks. Maxim of quality is evident as the students gives information and supports it with evidence from grandmother’s experience. It requires information provided in conversation to be genuine and justified (Vergis, 2017). In line 43, the student speaks about her grandmother’s dog being poisoned. The teacher gives a response by providing evidence that it is true dogs could get poisoned and she had seen this happen in Egypt. She supports the student’s ideas by giving an example from her own experience. Performative sentence is seen from an imitation of the grandmother’s voice by increasing the intonation. Performative sentences are acts of the performative verbs, which are self-verifying and achieve an objective based on the literal meaning (Searle, 1989). The rising intonation, in slow motion than in the usual conversation, describes the difference in the flow of words. The student also uses the personality referring to the grandmother like her, and this explains to the teacher that it is not just any other grandmother but her own.
The reference to a person, object, or event is appropriate in a conversation as it saves the speaker from repeating the subjects in every sentence. The first step of analysing deixis is to note existence of expressions that refer to something else (Hacks, 2017). In line 8, the student uses ‘she’ referring to her grandmother, while explaining about the ducks. In lines 12 and 13, ‘they’ is used to refer to the ducks. The discussion was on the ducks’ behaviour hence they directly relate to the ducks. Also, ‘their’ is used to refer to the duck’s feathers and described as white. ‘They’ is also used to refer to the dogs that sleep on top of the cars. Deixis specifies an identity or location from the perspective of the speaker or listener in the context of the conversation topic (Dylgjeri & Kazazi, 2013). They create flow of information for the parties to understand easily and evidence of concentration on the conversation from the listener.
By using the conversation analysis, the dialogue is descriptive. It reveals the behaviours of animals according to the parties’ understanding and experiences. The individual’s pauses for two seconds or less to give room for the other individual to continue with the conversation. The stressing on some words restores the topic of the conversation, reminding the listener of the responses to give on a particular statement. Conversation analysis discovers how participants understand and respond to one another in turns, focusing on the flow of the conversation (HALL, 2019). As seen in the conversation, the teacher gives an old saying of ‘like water off a duck’s buck’ after the conversation of the duck, the student responds with another saying of insulting people with their bad memories. The response goes in line with the first statement and responds with another saying. The example of bad memory that she is always forgetful like that. The flow of the conversation is determined by the responses given by the people engaged in the conversation.
People use language and body to communicate. The organisational principles give meaning to every idea one is putting across to the other party (Van Han, 2014). On the issue of the poisoning of dogs, the expression of the flow of words shows the discontentedness of the idea happening. The teacher responds by explaining that it also happens in Egypt but also gives a contrary opinion that dogs are not poisoned in Canada. One statement of the speaker leads to a relevant response by the second party on the same topic of discussion. This is also the maxim of relevance because of the flow of conversation while sticking to a topic. The conversation model of turn has identified significant delay before a response is given and in giving the descriptions before the other party gives the feedback (Levinson, 2016). The transcription symbols by use of (.) show the pausing used in the conversation, which is used in the listener agreeing to a point made or waiting for a response. Conversation analysis studies the human conduct to organise and construct the flow of the conversation.
Evaluation
Discourse analysis studies social life in the analysis of language while investigating meaning, using analytical approaches and theories to explain the use. These analysis approaches have advantages to attaining the objectives, and also limitations that suppress or assumes some concepts in the analysis. The approaches increase the ability to describe texts and understanding the topic of the conversation.
Pragmatics looks at how the language is used for communication rather than how the language is structured in the sentences. It is advantageous in understanding the communication flow of the conversation. The maxims of conversation inform the participants of the ideas being passed across. It also depicts the relevance of the topic, and one could easily tell when a participant moves away from the subject matter. Taking turns in conversations is controlled by pragmatics, which brings up the relevance of conversations between parties (Zhao, 2011). Pragmatics especially the maxims of quantity cannot be easily discovered as the individual speaking is the only one who has the evidence to support the claims they make. The listener may not know if the claim is true or false and may end up agreeing to it to allow the conversation continue or be concluded. Maxim of quantity cannot be verified by a second or third party or individual other than the speaker.
Conversation analysis helps to evaluate conversations to be understood by third parties. It analyses the speeches of participants in a dialogue and can be understood based on expressions used. One of the strengths of conversation analysis is that the themes in the analysis are ordinary and close (Paltridge, 2006). If language is used without context, it only displays the literal meaning, which might not make sense to the listener. It also achieves reliability from naturally recorded conversations to creating a meaningful written transcript for easy referencing by individuals. To add on, it addresses most important details of a conversation by stressing on important aspects of the conversation such as the details of the topic. It also offers the opportunity to study expressions in writing of the behaviour of participants of a conversation.
Conversation analysis is not self-sufficient as it has to be supported by symbols and keys to be meaningful (Hammersley, 2003). In creating an effective written dialogue using conversational analysis, the symbols have to be used to create meaning to the sentences. Another limitation is that most of the time, the conversational maxims are usually disregarded; hence, the intended meaning is not achieved by the writer or to the reader; this is because of the change in cultural communications of different societies or platforms (Spielmann, 1986). The analysis may also be interpreted differently by various readers or listeners especially if the meanings of the symbols are not well understood and this creates a conflict in the same conversation by different individuals. Misinterpretation is a common limitation of conversation analysis.
Conclusion.
Discourse analysis is a reliable, systematic, and valid evaluation of a conversation using analytical approaches such as pragmatics and conversation analysis. Pragmatics can use Grice’s maxims of conversation, quality, relevance, and manner. It gives a rule that should be followed in the analysis of a conversation. The use of deixis and presupposition creates a meaning to the listener through the interpretation made by the listener. The conversational analysis uses symbols to describe the flow of words and intonations in conversations. These approaches have their benefits and limitations that either provide the strength or suppresses the success of conversation analysis. Discourse analysis aims to understand language for both spoken and written conversations and gives a purpose to various types of dialect.
References
Bolden, G., & Hepburn, A. (2018). Transcription for Conversation Analysis. Oxford Research Encyclopedia Of Communication. doi: 10.1093/acrefore/9780190228613.013.131
Chametzky, R. (1992). Pragmatics, prediction, and relevance. Journal Of Pragmatics, 17(1), 63-72. doi: 10.1016/0378-2166(92)90029-b
Drew, P. (2018). The interface between pragmatics and conversation analysis. Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 59-84. doi: 10.1075/pbns.294.04dre
Dylgjeri, A., & Kazazi, L. (2013). Deixis in Modern Linguistics and Outside. Academic Journal Of Interdisciplinary Studies. doi: 10.5901/ajis.2012.v2n4p87
Fallis, D. (2012). Lying as a Violation of Grice’s First Maxim of Quality. Dialectica, 66(4), 563-581. doi: 10.1111/1746-8361.12007
Gardner, R. (2015). Conversation Analysis and orientation to learning. Journal Of Applied Linguistics And Professional Practice, 5(3), 229-244. doi: 10.1558/japl.v5i3.229
Green, G. M. (2008). Pragmatics and natural language understanding. New York, NY: Routledge.
Grundy, P. (2008). Doing Pragmatics. London: Hodder Education.
HALL, J. (2019). The Contributions of Conversation Analysis and Interactional Linguistics to a Usage-Based Understanding of Language: Expanding the Transdisciplinary Framework. The Modern Language Journal, 103, 80-94. doi: 10.1111/modl.12535
Hammersley, M. (2003). Conversation analysis and discourse analysis: Methods or paradigms? Discourse and Society, 14, 751-81.
Hanks, W. (2017). Deixis and Pragmatics. Oxford Research Encyclopedia Of Linguistics. doi: 10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.013.213
Harnish, R. (2002). Are Performative Utterances Declarations?. Speech Acts, Mind, And Social Reality, 41-64. doi: 10.1007/978-94-010-0589-0_4
Koudenburg, N., Postmes, T., & Gordijn, E. (2016). Beyond Content of Conversation. Personality And Social Psychology Review, 21(1), 50-71. doi: 10.1177/1088868315626022
Kleinke, S. (2010). Speaker activity and Grice’s maxims of conversation at the interface of Pragmatics and Cognitive Linguistics. Journal Of Pragmatics, 42(12), 3345-3366. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2010.05.008
Levinson, S. (2016). Turn-taking in Human Communication – Origins and Implications for Language Processing. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20(1), 6-14. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2015.10.010
Mazeland, H. (2006). Conversation Analysis. Encyclopedia Of Language & Linguistics, 153-163. doi: 10.1016/b0-08-044854-2/00314-x
Paltridge, B. (2006). Discourse analysis. London: Continuum International Publishing Group
Searle, J. (1989). How performatives work. Linguistics And Philosophy, 12(5), 535-558. doi: 10.1007/bf00627773
Spielmann, R. (1986). LINGUISTIC DISCOURSE ANALYSIS AND CONVERSATIONAL ANALYSIS. Journal Of Literary Semantics, 15(2). doi: 10.1515/jlse.1986.15.2.98
Wiemann, J., & Knapp, M. (1975). Turn-taking in Conversations. Journal Of Communication, 25(2), 75-92. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.1975.tb00582.x
Van Han, N. (2014). Contrast and Critique of Two Approaches to Discourse Analysis: Conversation Analysis and Speech Act Theory. Advances In Language And Literary Studies, 5(4). doi: 10.7575/aiac.alls.v.5n.4p.155
Vergis, N. (2017). The interaction of the Maxim of Quality and face concerns: An experimental approach using the vignette technique. Journal Of Pragmatics, 118, 38-50. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2017.07.009
APPENDIX 1
Student: I’ve
Seen pigeons bathing-
Teacher: really, Birds I think (2.0)
it’s neat how Birds whack with their
feathers in the water, especially ducks(.)
if you ever seen ducks in the water and
how it just rolls right off the back?
Student:
Yeah, because my grandmother had ducks
before and she told me that when the
ducks are in the field with mud [mm-hmm]
the ducks look completely dirty but for
a few seconds later (.) [they’re clean] and they
shake off the wet mud, and they’re and
their feather is still white and
Beautiful (.) whereas as pretty as shiny as
They were before.
Teacher:
Right
there’s an old saying that is like water
off a duck’s back
(you don’t have to worry about it just goes away)
Student: or like insulting
people with their bad memories before them,
you’re remembering things are just like
water drops on a duck’s back just
or you pour water on the duck’s back(.)
[mm-hmm] you just dont remember it and it
flows away
Teacher:
which is it a great saying I
think especially for bad memories(.) you
(don’t look for that (.) so why not
Student: like seeing people that has really
bad remembering things(.) like tomorrow we’ll
have lunch together-
and next day(.) heck no. you forgot this I
wait you for two hours(.) and I’m going to
be tardy .h
Teacher:
I am very much that way, I like
to say: I would lose my own head if it
wasn’t attached to my body(.)
Student: that’s what
my grandma says too, she said ? hey Mary you’re
going to lost her own head if it’s not
connected to your neck (.) you lost everything [everything] forgetful forgetful forgetful (.) [mmh] that truth is her
dog got poisoned by one of the mean
neighbors
Teacher:
they do that a lot in Egypt as
Well, it’s not so much in Canada at home,
if there’s dogs that you don’t like you
Call:
by law and they take care of it (.)but in
Egypt, they would poison the dogs too – but
it was so funny because you would see a
pack of dogs, and they’d be sleeping on
top of the cars(.) instead of just like in
>the corners of the streets or whatever
they’d be on top of the cars< (.) so if you
had to drive your cars you’d have to
shoot the dogs away
APPENDIX II
Line Speaker Transcription Analysis Student I’ve seen pigeons bathing- Started her turn Maxim of manner by starting
her turn
CA abrupt stop –
Teacher really, Birds I think (2.0) Agreed as she continues Maxim of relevance agrees
it’s neat how Birds whack with their Makes a statement Relevance
feathers in the water especially ducks(.) Insists on the duck and pauses CA stress on word ducks and
pause (.)
if you ever seen ducks in the water and Explains Maxim of quality
how it just rolls right off the back? Concludes with high intonation CA Rising intonation ?
Student Yeah, because my grandmother had ducks Acknowledges giving evidence Maxim of quality-Gives
evidence
before and she told me that when the Explains Maxim of quality
ducks are in the field with mud [mm-hmm] Acknowledges CA- Overlapping
conversation
the ducks look completely dirty but for Describes Maxim of quality
a few seconds later (.) [they’re clean] and they Pauses and follows with unclear words CA- Pause, unclear words
shake off the wet mud and they’re and Continues explaining Maxim of quality
their feather is still white and Gives description of duck CA- Stress on word white
Beautiful (.) whereas as pretty as shiny as Continues and pauses CA- Pause
They were before. Concludes Maxim of conversation
Concludes her turn
Teacher Right Acknowledges Maxim of relevance
agrees
there’s an old saying that is like water Acknowledges using a saying Maxim of quality, supports
information
off a duck’s back Concludes the saying Maxim of quality
(you don’t have to worry about it just goes away) Background feedback in a higher speed CA conversation pace
increases
Student or like insulting Gives alternative example Maxim of quality, supports
using another example
people with their bad memories before them, Continues explaining Maxim of relevance
you’re remembering things are just like Further explains the saying Maxim of quality
water drops on a duck’s back just Relates bad memories to water on duck’s back Maxim of quality
or you pour water on the duck’s back(.) Concludes and Pauses CA- pause
[mm-hmm] you just don’t remember it and it
flows away Acknowledges while providing more support CA- agreeing while words
overlap [ ]
Teacher which is it a great saying I Concurs with the saying CA- stress on word great
think especially for bad memories(.) you Gives own opinion and pauses CA- Pause (.)
(don’t look for that (.) so why not Continues explaining CA- Unclear information
Pause
Student like seeing people that has really Gives another scenario Maxim of quality- supports
bad remembering things(.) like tomorrow we’ll Practical example CA- Pause (.)
have lunch together- Example showing continuation CA- continuity of sentence –
and next day(.) heck no. you forgot this I Continues with example and pauses Pragmatic- performative
Sentence. !
wait you for two hours(.) and I’m going to Explains amount of time in waiting CA Pause
be tardy (.h) Explains action to be taken CA- Inhales .h
Teacher I am very much that way, I like Acknowledges that she is like that (Forgets easily) Maxim of quality- gives
evidence
to say: I would lose my own head if it Uses a saying to describe her forgetting nature CA- Stretches the the syllable
ay :
wasn’t attached to my body(.) Continues with saying and pauses CA- pause (.)
Student that’s what Acknowledges giving example of the grandmother Maxim of quality- evidence
of grandmother experience
my grandma says too, she said ? hey Mary you’re Explains in a rising intonation CA- Rising intonation ?
Stress on Mary
going to lost her own head if it’s not Explains grandmother’s saying Performative sentence
connected to your neck (.) you lost everything [everything] forgetful forgetful forgetful (.) Continues explaining CA Pause (.)
Overlapping words [ ]
Pause (.)
[mmh] that truth is her Acknowledges Overlapping [ ]
dog got poisoned by one of the mean Gives the reason behind grandmother’s attitude stressing on the main information CA stress on words poisoned
and mean
neighbors Source of the attitude Teacher they do that a lot in Egypt as Gives an example of location where dogs are killed Maxim of manner, turn taking
Well, it’s not so much in Canada at home, Continues explaining Maxim of quality
if there’s dogs that you don’t like you Gives alternative of not poisoning Maxim of quality
Call: Action that can be taken CA Stretch on syllable ..ll :
by law and they take care of it (.)but in Explains the party that helps to take the action CA pause
Egypt, they would poison the dogs too – but Explains dog poisoning CA ubrupt stop –
it was so funny because you would see a Reasons that led to poisoning Maxim of quality
pack of dogs, and they’d be sleeping on Explains reason Maxim of quality
top of the cars(.) instead of just like in Continues explaining and pauses CA pause
>the corners of the streets or whatever Explains faster than before CA words said faster than
usual conversation > <
they’d be on top of the cars< (.) so if you Continues explaining CA pause (.)
had to drive your cars you’d have to Gives solution to solve the dog problem Maxim of quality
shoot the dogs away Continues explaining Maxim of quality