English Language Teaching in its Social Context
English Language Teaching in its Social Context
English Language Teaching in its Social Context
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
SAFE-TALI< 233function is to signal participation rather than level of understand<strong>in</strong>g, i.e. it is aga<strong>in</strong> socialrather than academic <strong>in</strong> purpose.The social function of chorus<strong>in</strong>g became even more clearly evident when Iexam<strong>in</strong>ed the lesson as a whole. I discovered that the students are required, <strong>in</strong> response toboth k<strong>in</strong>ds of cue, to provide ma<strong>in</strong>ly confirmative onc- or two-word responses, or responseswhich repeat <strong>in</strong>formation on the board or <strong>in</strong>formation which has been recycled aga<strong>in</strong> andaga<strong>in</strong> by Mrs Gumbi. This suggests that chorus<strong>in</strong>g gives the students opportunities toparticipate <strong>in</strong> ways that reducc the possibility of the loss of face associated with provid<strong>in</strong>g<strong>in</strong>correct responses to tcacher elicitations, or not be<strong>in</strong>g able to provide responses at all. Itis <strong>in</strong>terest<strong>in</strong>g to note that the chorus<strong>in</strong>g is more evident at the beg<strong>in</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g of the lesson thanlater on. Once responses have been well rehearsed, so that the chance of be<strong>in</strong>g wrongpublicly is reduced, more <strong>in</strong>dividual responses are elicited, and at the end students are even<strong>in</strong>vited to leave their desks and carry out the very public act of writ<strong>in</strong>g their responseson the board.There is, of course, noth<strong>in</strong>g unusual about teachers need<strong>in</strong>g to resort to face-sav<strong>in</strong>gstrategies, s<strong>in</strong>ce the asymmetrical role relations between teachers and students to be found<strong>in</strong> most parts of the world ensure that the risk of face-threat is great. As Cwden (1 979: 147)expla<strong>in</strong>s, ‘teachers, by the very nature of their professional role, are cont<strong>in</strong>uously threaten<strong>in</strong>gboth aspects of their students’ face constra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g their freedom of action; evaluat<strong>in</strong>g, oftennegatively, a high proportion of student acts and utterances; and often <strong>in</strong>terrupt<strong>in</strong>g studentwork and student talk’. To reduce this risk, teachers employ face-sav<strong>in</strong>g strategies such asexpress<strong>in</strong>g directives <strong>in</strong>directly by means of <strong>in</strong>terrogatives, e.g. ‘Can you open your books,please?’ This strategy reduces the sense of imposition associated with the directiveby suggest<strong>in</strong>g that the students are free to decide whether or not to comply. However, theneed to resort to face-sav<strong>in</strong>g strategies is particularly great <strong>in</strong> KwaZulu classrooms becausethe asymmetry <strong>in</strong> the relative status of teachers and students is marked. This reflects themarked asymmetry <strong>in</strong> the relativc status of adults and childrcn <strong>in</strong> the wider community.Accord<strong>in</strong>g to Mariannc Claude’s <strong>in</strong>formants (see Chick and Claude 1985), an adult <strong>in</strong> thatcommunity has the right to ask any child, who may well be a stranger, to do errands forthem (i.e. take a message to someone; buy someth<strong>in</strong>g at the shop) and may even chastise achild not their own.Another strik<strong>in</strong>g feature of this episode is the remarkably rhythmic manner <strong>in</strong> whichteacher and students synchronise their verbal and prosodic behaviours, particularly <strong>in</strong>accomplish<strong>in</strong>g the chorus<strong>in</strong>g sequences. <strong>Context</strong> analysts (e.g. Schefl<strong>in</strong> 1973; Condon 1977;Kendon 1973, 1979; McDermott, Gospod<strong>in</strong>off and Aaron 1978) have demonstrated thatparticipants <strong>in</strong> conversations organise their behaviours <strong>in</strong> co-operative, reciprocal,rhythmically co-ord<strong>in</strong>ated ways <strong>in</strong> signall<strong>in</strong>g to one another and negotiat<strong>in</strong>g the context oftheir talk.This enables them to make sense of what it is that they are do<strong>in</strong>g together. In theepisode such <strong>in</strong>teractional synchrony is possible, presumably, because the teacher and herstudents are able to draw on their shared, implicit knowledge of the discourse conventionsassociated with conventional <strong>in</strong>teractional styles. I suggest that this synchrony contributesto the perception that purposeful activity and learn<strong>in</strong>g are tak<strong>in</strong>g place.To sum up, the micro-ethnographic analysis of this episode reveals <strong>in</strong>teractionalbehaviour consistent with Zulu-<strong>English</strong> <strong>in</strong>teractional styles identified <strong>in</strong> a study of <strong>in</strong>terethnicencounters (see Chick 1985). Particularly noteworthy features of the discourse are thechorus<strong>in</strong>g behaviour and the remarkably rhythmic manner <strong>in</strong> which the participantssynchronise their <strong>in</strong>teractional behaviours <strong>in</strong> accomplish<strong>in</strong>g the chorus<strong>in</strong>g sequences.Analysis revealed that thcse putative styles serve social rather than academic functions. Forexample, they help the students to avoid the loss of face associated with bc<strong>in</strong>g wrong <strong>in</strong> a