English Language Teaching in its Social Context

330 JOAN SWANNWhile transcripts allow a relatively detailed examination of spoken language, they onlyprovide a partial record: thcy cannot faithfully reproduce evcry aspect of talk. Transcriberswill tend to pay attention to different aspects depending upon their interests, which meansthat a transcript is already an interpretation of the event it seeks to record. Elinor Ochs, ina now classic account of ‘Transcription as theory’, suggests that ‘transcription is a selectiveprocess reflecting theoretical goals and definitions’ (1 979, p. 44). This point is illustratedby the sample layouts and transcription conventions discussed below.Transcription conventionsMany published transcripts, such as those cited elsewhere in this volume, use conventionsof written language such as punctuation in representing speech. But because written downspeech is not the same as writing it can be quite hard to punctuate.If you do wish to punctuate a transcript bear in mind that in so doing you are givingthe speech a particular interpretation. Compare the following two methods of punctuatinga teacher’s question(s):Now, think very carefully. What would happen if we cut one of those hollow balls inhalf? What would we find inside?Now, think very carefully what would happen if we cut one of those hollow balls inhalf. What would we find inside?Use of punctuation represents a trade-off between legibility and accessibility of the transcriptand what might be a premature and impressionistic analysis of the data. It is probably bestat least initially to use as little conventional punctuation as possible. Several sets oftranscription conventions are available to indicate features of spoken language. Some ofthese are highly detailed, allowing transcribers to record intakes of breath, increased volume,stress, syllable lengthening etc. (see, for instance, Sacks, Schegloff and Jefferson, 1974;Ochs, 1979). Such conventions are designed to produce accurate transcriptions, but thereis a danger that they will lend a misleading sense of scientific objectivity to the exercise.Rather than being ‘objectively identified’ such features of speech are likely to correspondto the transcriber’s initial interpretations of their data.Bearing in mind this caveat, Figure 20.2 illustrates a simple set of conventions fortranscribing spoken language.Further transcription conventions may be added if need be. Alternatively, as in Figure20.2, you can leave a wide margin to comment on features such as loudness, whispering,or other noises that add to the meaning of the talk (as with other aspects of transcriptionthese will necessarily be selective).In Figure 20.2 I have used an extract from field-notes to contextualise the transcript.In the transcript itself, I have followed the frequently-uscd convention of referring to thespeakers simply as teacher and students. An alternative is to give speakers pseudonyms (seethe discussion of confidentiality under ‘Adopting a researcher stance’ above).The sequencein Figure 20.2 comes from an English lesson carried out with seven-year-old students in aschool in Moscow, in Russia. The students are being encouraged to rehearse certainvocabulary and structures. The teacher addresses each student directly to ensure theycontribute and uses features such as humour (‘I’m like a tiger’) to further encourage thestudents. In this extract Student 2 seems unsure of how to respond to the teacher’s question(as indicated by his hesitation). In an attempt to help, the teacher offers him suggestions for