Cover not available
Part of
Speaking in a Second Language
Edited by Rosa Alonso Alonso
[AILA Applied Linguistics Series 17] 2018
► pp. 69–103

Chapter 4
L2 talk as social accomplishment

| University of Southern Denmark
| University of Illinois
This position paper builds on ethnomethodological conversation analysis to make a number of interrelated, empirically derived claims about speaking a second language and learning to do it as a social endeavor. We will show that: (1) language is primarily action, that linguistic units are primarily designed and used for and learned as actions in situ; (2) language is occasioned and environmentally contingent, and speaking is turn-taking that presupposes an ability to monitor other people’s talk; and (3) language, learning and cognition are socially distributed, co-constructed, embodied and embedded in local situations. They are each other’s ongoing continuations or extensions, made visible by verbal and bodily behavior. They rely on other people’s actions in situ as language is co-constructed and language-as-action emerges.
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • Background
    • Interaction and SLA research
    • Ethnomethodology and conversation analysis
    • Socially distributed cognition
  • Empirical data
    • Showcasing embedded, embodied, and extended cognition
    • Collaborative word searches
    • Collaborative completion
    • Embedded, embodied, and extended cognition in learning over time
  • Discussion and conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
  • Glossary
Published online: 12 April 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/aals.17.04esk
References (136)
References
Atkinson, D. (2002). Toward a sociocognitive approach to second language acquisition. The Modern Language Journal 86 (4): 525–545. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Atkinson, D. (2011). A sociocognitive approach to second language acquisition. In Alternative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition, D. Atkinson (ed.), 143–166. New York, NY: Taylor and Francis. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Block, D. (2003). The Social Turn in Second Language Acquisition. Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Brouwer, C. E. (2003). Word searches in NNS-NS interaction: Opportunities for language learning? The Modern Language Journal, 87 (4): 534–545. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2004). On doing pronunciation. In Second Language Conversations, R. Gardner, & J. Wagner (eds.), 93–113. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Brouwer, C. E., & Wagner, J. (2004). Developmental issues in second language conversation. Journal of Applied Linguistics 1: 29–47. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Burch, R. A. (2014). Pursuing information. A conversation analytic perspective on communication strategies. Language Learning 64 (3): 651–684. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Button, G. (1991). Ethnomethodology and the Human Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Button, G., Coulter, J., Lee, J. R.E., & Sharrock, W. (1995). Computers, Minds and Conduct. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Cadierno, T. & Eskildsen, S. W. (eds.) (2015). Usage-based Perspectives on Second Language Learning. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clark, A. (2008), Supersizing the Mind: Embodiment, Action and Cognitive Extension. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Bot, K. & Larsen-Freeman, D. (2011). Researching second language development from a dynamic systems perspective. In A Dynamic Approach to Second Language Development: Methods and Techniques, M. H. Verspoor, K. de Bot & W. Lowie (eds.), 5–23. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Doughty, C. & M. H. Long (eds.). (2003). The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition. Malden, MA: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Douglas Fir Group, the. (2016). A transdisciplinary framework for SLA in a multilingual world. The Modern Language Journal 100 (Supplement): 19–47. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Drew, P. & Heritage, J. (1992). Talk at Work. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Duff, P. A. & Talmy, S. (2011). Language socialization Approaches to second language acquisition. In Alternative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition, D. Atkinson (ed.), 95–116. New York: Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C. (2014). Cognitive and social language use. In Studies in Second Language Acquisition 36: 397–402. [Special Issue Bridging the Gap. Cognitive and social approaches to research in second language learning and teaching, J. Hulstijn, R. F. Young, & L. Ortega (eds.).]Google Scholar
(2015). Cognitive and social aspects of learning from usage. In Usage-based Perspectives on Second Language Learning, T. Cadierno, & S. W. Eskildsen (eds.), 49–74. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N. C., & Larsen-Freeman, D. (2006). Language emergence: Implications for applied linguistics. Introduction to the special issue. Applied Linguistics 27 (4): 558–589. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R. (2005). Planning and task-based performance. In Planning and Task Performance in a Second Language, R. Ellis (ed.), 3–34. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R. (2009). The differential effects of three types of task planning on the fluency, complexity, and accuracy in L2 oral production. Applied Linguistics 30: 474–509. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eskildsen, S. W. (2011). The L2 inventory in action: Conversation analysis and usage-based linguistics in SLA. In L2 Learning as Social Practice: Conversation-Analytic Perspectives, G. Pallotti & J. Wagner (eds.), 337–373. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai‘i, National Foreign Language Resource Center.Google Scholar
(2012). L2 negation constructions at work. Language Learning 62(2): 335–372. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eskildsen, S.W. (2015). What counts as a developmental sequence?: Exemplar-based L2 learning of English questions. Language Learning 65(1): 33–62. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eskildsen, S. W. (2016). The emergence of creativity in L2 English – a usage-based case-study. In Multiple Perspectives on Language Play, N. Bell (ed.), 281–316. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2018). “We’re Learning A Lot of New Words”: Encountering New L2 Vocabulary Outside of Class. The Modern Language Journal. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(In press). L2 constructions and interactional competence: Subordination and coordination in English L2 learning. In What Is Applied Cognitive Linguistics? Answers from Current SLA Research, A. Tyler & C. Moder (eds.). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logo
(forthc). “Let me help you”: Learning to do and correct public writing in the L2 classroom. In Kunitz, S., Sert, O. & Markee, N. (eds.), Emerging Issues in Classroom Discourse and Interaction: Theoretical and Applied CA Perspectives on Pedagogy. Dordrecht: Springer.
Eskildsen, S. W. & Cadierno, T. (2015). Advancing usage-based approaches to L2 studies. In Usage-based perspectives on second language learning, T. Cadierno & S. W. Eskildsen (eds.), 1–18. Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eskildsen, S. W., Cadierno, T. & Li, P. (2015). On the development of motion constructions in four learners of L2 English. In Usage-based perspectives on second language learning, T. Cadierno & S. W. Eskildsen (eds.), 207–232. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eskildsen, S. W. & Theodórsdóttir, G. (2017). Constructing L2 learning spaces: Ways to achieve learning inside and outside the classroom. Applied Linguistics 38(2): 143–164. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eskildsen, S. W. & Wagner, J. (2013). Recurring and shared gestures in the L2 classroom: Resources for teaching and Learning. European Journal of Applied Linguistics 1: 139–161Google Scholar
(2015). Embodied L2 construction learning. Language Learning 65: 419–448. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(in press). From trouble in the talk to new resources –The interplay of bodily and linguistic resources in the talk of a novice speaker of English as a second language. In Documenting Change across Time: Longitudinal Studies on the Organization of Social Interaction, S. Pekarek Doehler, E. González-Martínez, & J. Wagner (eds.). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Firth, A., & Wagner, J. (1997). On discourse, communication, and (some) fundamental concepts in SLA research. The Modern Language Journal 81 (3): 285–300. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Firth, A. & Wagner, J. (2007). S/FL learning as a social accomplishment: Elaborations on a “reconceptualised” SLA. The Modern Language Journal 91: 800–819. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fox Tree, J. E. & Schrock, J. C. (2002). Basic meaning of you know and I mean . Journal of Pragmatics 34: 727–747. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Francis, D. & Hester, S. (2004). An Invitation to Ethnomethodology: Language, Society and Interaction. London: Sage. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fujii, A., & Makey, A. (2009). Interactional feedback in learner-learner interactions in a task-based EFL classroom. International Review of Applied Lingusitics 47: 267–301. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gallagher, S. (2005). How the Body Shapes the Mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in Ethnomethodogy. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Gass, S. (2003). Input and Interaction. In The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition, C. Doughty & M. H. Long (eds.), 224–255. Malden, MA: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015). Comprehensible input and output in classroom interaction. In The Handbook of Classroom Discourse and Interaction, N. Markee (ed.), 182–197. Malden, MA: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gass, S., & Mackey, A. (2007). Input, interaction and output in second language acquisition. In Theories in Second Language Acquisition. An Introduction, B. VanPatten & J. Williams (eds.), 175–199. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Goodwin, C. (1979). The interactive construction of a sentence in natural conversation. In Everyday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology¸ G. Psathas (ed.), 97–121. New York, NY: Irvington Publishers.Google Scholar
(2000a). Action and embodiment within situated human interaction. Journal of Pragmatics 32: 1489–1522. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2000b). Practices of seeing: visual analysis: an ethnomethdological approach. In. Handbook of Visual Analysis, T. van Leeuwen & J. Carey (eds.), 157–182. London: Sage.Google Scholar
(2003a). Pointing as situated practice. In Pointing: Where Language, Culture and Cognition Meet, S. Kita (ed.), 217–241. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
(2003b). The body in action. In Discourse, the Body, and Identity, J. Coupland & R. Gwyn (eds.), 19–42. Mahwah, N.J: Lawrence Erlbaum. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, C. (2007). Participation, stance and affect in the organization of activities. Discourse and Society 18: 53–73. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, C. (2013). The co-operative, transformative organization of human action and knowledge. Journal of Pragmatics 43: 8–23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, C. & Goodwin, M. (1986). Gesture and coparticipation in the activity of searching for a word. Semiotica 62: 51–75.Google Scholar
Hall, J. K., Cheng, A., & Carlson, M. T. (2006). Reconceptualizing multicompetence as a theory of language knowledge. Applied Linguistics 27 (2): 220–240. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hall, J. K., Hellermann, J. & Pekarek Doehler, S. (eds.) (2011). L2 Interactional Competence and Development. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hall, J. K. & Verplaetse, L. S. (2000). The development of second and foreign language learning through classroom interaction. In Second and Foreign Language Learning through Classroom Interaction, J. K. Hall, & L. S. Verplaetse (eds.), 1–20. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hauser, E. (2013). Stability and change in one adult’s second language english negation. Language Learning 63 (3): 463–498. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hayashi, M. (2003). Language and the body as resources for collaborative action: Astudy of word searches in Japanese conversation. Research on Language and Social Interaction 36 (2): 109–141. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hellermann, J. (2008). Social Actions for Classroom Language Learning. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hellermann, J., Eskildsen, S. W., Pekarek Doehler, S. & Piirainen-Marsh, A. (eds.). (forthc.). Conversation Analytic Research on L2 Interaction in the Wild: The Complex Ecology of Learning-In-Action. Dordrecht: Springer.
Heritage, J. (1984a). A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement. In Structures of Social Action, J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (eds.), 299–345. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(1984b). Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
(2012). Epistemics in action: Action formation and territories of knowledge. Research on Language and Social Interaction 45 (1): 1–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heritage, J. & Clayman, S. (2010). Talk in Action: Interactions, Identities and Institutions. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heritage, J. & Robinson, J. D. (2011). ‘Some’ vs ‘any’ medical issues: Encouraging patients to reveal their unmet concerns. In Applied Conversation Analysis: Changing Institutional Practices, C. Antaki (ed.), 15–31. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hulstijn, J., Young, R. F. & Ortega, L. (eds.). (2014). Bridging the Gap. Cognitive and Social Approaches to Research in Second Language Learning and Teaching. Special issue of Studies in Second Language Acquisition.Google Scholar
Hutchby, I. & Wooffitt, R. (2008). Conversation Analysis, (2nd edition). Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the Wild. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Jacoby, S. & Ochs, E. (1995). Co-construction: An introduction. Research on Language and Social Interaction 28: 171–183. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jefferson, G. (2004). Glossary of transcript symbols with an Introduction. In Conversation Analysis: Studies from the First Generation, G. H. Lerner (ed.), 13–23. Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kanagy, R. (1999). Interactional routines as a mechanism for L2 acquisition and socialization in an immersion context. Journal of Pragmatics 31: 1467–1492. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kasper, G. (2009). Locating cognition in second language interaction and learning: Inside the skull or in public view? International Review of Applied Linguistics 47: 13–36. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kasper, G., & Wagner, J. (2011). A conversation-analytic approach to second language acquisition. In Alternative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition, D. Atkinson (Ed.), 117–142. New York: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
(2014). Conversation Analysis in Applied Linguistics. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 34: 171–212. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Koschmann, T. (2011). Understanding understanding in action. Journal of Pragmatics 43: 435–437. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2013). Conversation analysis and learning in interaction. In Conversation Analysis, K. Mortensen, & J. Wagner (eds.). In The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics, C. A. Chapelle (ed.), 1038–1043. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Kramsch, C. (1986). From language proficiency to interactional competence. The Modern Language Journal 70 (4): 366–372. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kunitz, S., Sert, O. & Markee, N. forthc. Emerging Issues in Classroom Discourse and Interaction: Theoretical and Applied CA Perspectives on Pedagogy. Dordrecht: Springer.
Kunitz, S. & Skogmyr Marian, K. (2017). Tracking immanent language learning behavior over time in task-based classroom work. Tesol Quarterly. 51: 507–535. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kurhila, S. (2006). Second Language Interaction. John Benjamins, Amsterdam. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lantolf, J. P. (2011). Sociocultural theory. A dialectical approach to L2 research. In Handbook of Second Language Acquisition S. M. Gass, & A. Mackey (eds.), 57–72. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lantolf, J. P., & Thorne, S. L. (2006). Sociocultural Theory and the Genesis of Second Language Development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lerner, G. (1991). On the syntax of sentences-in-progress. Language in Society 20 (3): 441–458. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In Handbook of second language acquisition, W. C. Ritchie, & T. K. Bhatia (eds.), 413–468. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Mackey, A. (2013). Input, Interaction, and Corrective Feedback in L2 Learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B. (1999). The emergence of language from embodiment. In The Emergence of Language, B. MacWhinney (ed.), 213–256. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
(2005). The emergence of grammar from perspective. In Grounding Cognition. The Role of Perception and Action in Memory, Language, and Thinking, D. Pecher & R. A. Zwaan (eds.), 198–223. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Markee, N. (1994). Toward an ethnomethodological respecification of second-language acquisition studies. In Research Methodology in Second-Language Acqusition, E. E. Tarone, S. M. Gass & A. D. Cohen (eds.), 89–116. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
(2000). Conversation Analysis. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2008). Toward a learning behavior tracking methodology for CA-for-SLA. Applied Linguistics 29 (3): 404–427. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Markee, N. (2011). Doing, and justifying doing, avoidance. Journal of Pragmatics 43: 602–615. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Markee, N. & Kunitz, S. (2013). Doing planning and task performance in second language acquisition: An ethnomethodological respecification. Language Learning 63 (4): 629–664. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
May, S. (ed.). (2015). The multilingual turn: Implications for SLA, TESOL and bilingual education. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
McHoul, A. W. (1978). The organization of turns at formal talk in the classroom. Language in Society 7: 183–213. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1990). The organization of repair in classroom talk. Language in Society 19: 349– 377. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mehan, H. (1979). Learning Lessons. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mondada, L. (2014a). The local constitution of multimodal resources for social interaction. Journal of Pragmatics 65: 137–156. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2014b). Pointing, talk and the bodies: Reference and joint attention as embodied interactional achievements. In From Gesture in Conversation to Visible Utterance in Action, M. Seyfeddinipur & M. Gullberg (eds.), 95–124. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2014c). Bodies in action: Multimodal analysis of walking and talking. Language and Dialogue 4: 357–403. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2016). Challenges of multimodality: Language and the body in social interaction. Journal of Sociolinguistics 20: 336–366. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mori, J. (2010). Learning language in real time: A case study of the Japanese demonstrative pronoun “are” in word-search sequences. In Pragmatics in language learning, vol 12, G. Kasper, H. t. Nguyen, D. Yoshimi & J. K. Yoshioka (eds.), 15–42. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i, National Foreign Language Resource Center.Google Scholar
Mori, J, & Hasegawa, A. (2009). Doing being a foreign language learner in a classroom: Embodiment of cognitive states as social events. International Review of Applied Linguistics 47: 65–94. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mortensen, K. (2011). Doing word explanation in interaction. In L2 Learning as Social Practice: Conversation-Analytic Perspectives, G. Pallotti & J. Wagner (eds.), 135–162. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai’i, National Foreign Language Resource Center.Google Scholar
Nevile, M. (2015). The embodied turn in research on language and social interaction. Research on Language and Social Interaction 48: 121–151. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ortega, L. (2014). Ways forward for a bi/multilingual turn in SLA. In The multilingual turn: Implications for SLA, TESOL and bilingual education, S. May (ed.), 32–53. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Östman, J.-O. (1981). You Know. A Discourse-Functional Approach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pallotti, G., & Wagner, J. (eds.). (2011). L2 Learning as Social Practice: Conversation-Analytic Perspectives. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai’i, National Foreign Language Resource Center.Google Scholar
Pease, A. & Pease, B., (2006). The Definitive Book of Body Language. New York: Bantam BooksGoogle Scholar
Pedersen, H. F. (2014). Om konstruktionen sån en N i danske samtaler. S.O.S. Skrifter om samtalegrammatik 1 (1): 1–23. [On the construction a kind of N in Danish conversations. S.O.S. Notes on the grammar of conversation 1 (1): 1–23]
Pekarek Doehler, S., & Pochon-Berger, E. (2015). The development of L2 interactional competence: evidence from turn-taking organization, sequence organization, repair organization and preference organization. In Usage-based Perspectives on Second Language Learning, T. Cadierno & S. W. Eskildsen (eds.), 233–268. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Reder, S. (2005). The “Lab School.” Focus on Basics, 8(A). Available at [URL]Google Scholar
Robbins, P. & Aydede, M. (2009). A short primer on situated cognition. In The Cambridge Handbook of Situated Cognition, P. Robbins & M. Aydede (eds.), 3–10. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Roehr-Brackin, K. (2015). Long-term development in an instructed adult L2 learner: Usage-based and complexity theory applied. In Usage-based Perspectives on Second Language Learning, T. Cadierno, & S. W. Eskildsen (eds.), 75–104. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rupert, R. D. (2011). Cognitive systems and the supersized mind. Philosophical Studies 152: 427– 436. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turntaking for conversation. Language 50: 696–735. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, E. A. (1972). Notes on a conversational practice: Formulating place. In Studies in Social Interaction, D. Sudbow (ed.), Glencoe, IL: Free Press.Google Scholar
(1979). The relevance of repair to syntax-for-conversation. In Syntax and Semantics, vol. 12., Givon, T. (ed.), 261–286. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
(1987). Between macro and micro: contexts and other connections. In The Micro-Macro Link, J. Alexander, B. Giesen, R. Munch & N. Smelser (eds.), 207–234. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
(1992). Repair after next turn: The last structurally provided defense of intersubjectivity in conversation. The American Journal of Sociology 97 (5): 1295–1345. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2007). Sequence Organization in Interaction. A Primer in Conversation Analysis. Volume 1. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, E. A., Jefferson, G., & Sacks, H. (1977). The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language 53: 361–382. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, E. A., Koshik, I., Olsher, D. & Jacoby, S. (2002). Conversation analysis and applied linguistics. ARAL 22: 3–31. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Seedhouse, P. (2004). The Interactional Architecture of the Language Classroom: A Conversation Analysis Perspective. Oxford: Blackwell’sGoogle Scholar
Seo. M.-S. & Koshik, I. (2012). A conversation analytic study of gestures that engender repair in ESL conversational tutoring. Journal of Pragmatics 42: 2219–2239 DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stam, G. (2015). Changes in thinking-for-speaking: A longitudinal case study. The Modern Language Journal 99 (Supplement): 83–99. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stivers, T. (2010). An overview of the question-response system in American English conversation. Journal of Pragmatics 42: 2772–2781. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stivers, T., Mondada, L., & Steensig, J. (2011). Knowledge, morality and affiliation in social interaction. In The Morality of Knowledge in Conversation, T. Stivers, L. Mondada, & J. Steensig (eds.), 3–26. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Swain, M., & Deters, P. (2007). “New” mainstream SLA theory: Expanded and enriched. The Modern Language Journal 91: 820–836. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
ten Have, Paul. (2004). Understanding Qualitative Research and Ethnomethodology. London: Sage. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2007). Doing Conversation Analysis: A Practical Guide (2nd edition). London: Sage DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Theodórsdóttir, G. & Eskildsen, S. W. (2011). Achieving intersubjectivity and doing learning: The use of English as a lingua franca in Icelandic L2. Nordand 6 (2), 59–85.Google Scholar
Thorne, S. L. & Hellermann, J. (2015). Sociocultural approaches to expert-novice relationships in second language interaction. In The handbook of classroom discourse and interaction, N. Markee (ed.), 281–298. Chichester, UK: Wiley Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Compernolle, R. A. (2015). The emergence of sociolingusitic competence in L2 classroom interaction. In The Handbook of Classroom Discourse and Interaction, N. Markee (ed.), 265–280. Chichester, UK: Wiley Blackwell.Google Scholar
van Compernolle, R. A. & McGregor, J. (eds.). (2016). Authenticity, Language, and Interaction in Second Language Contexts. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wagner, J. (2015). Designing for language learning in the wild. Creating social infrastructures for second language learning. In Usage-based Perspectives on Second Language Learning, T. Cadierno & S. W. Eskildsen (eds.), 75–104. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Watson-Gegeo, K. (2004). Mind, language and epistemology: Towards a language socialization paradigm for SLA. Modern Language Journal 88 (3): 331–350. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zuengler, J. & Cole, KM. (2005). Language socialization and second language learning. In Handbook of Research in Second Language Teaching and Learning, E. Hinkel (ed.), 301–316. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence ErlbaumGoogle Scholar
Cited by (22)

Cited by 22 other publications

Markee, Numa
2024. Chapter 7. Doing conversation analysis. In Less Frequently Used Research Methodologies in Applied Linguistics [Research Methods in Applied Linguistics, 6], ► pp. 111 ff. DOI logo
Eilola, Laura
2023. The design of requests by adult L2 users with emergent literacy. Classroom Discourse 14:2 ► pp. 167 ff. DOI logo
HELLERMANN, JOHN & STEVEN L. THORNE
2022. Collaborative Mobilizations of Interbodied Communication for Cooperative Action. The Modern Language Journal 106:S1 ► pp. 89 ff. DOI logo
Sert, Olcay
2022.  Conversation Analysis in TESOL . In Research Methods in Language Teaching and Learning, ► pp. 147 ff. DOI logo
Majlesi, Ali Reza
2021. The Intersubjective Objectivity of Learnables. In Classroom-based Conversation Analytic Research [Educational Linguistics, 46], ► pp. 41 ff. DOI logo
ATKINSON, DWIGHT
2019. Beyond the Brain: Intercorporeality and Co‐Operative Action for SLA Studies. The Modern Language Journal 103:4 ► pp. 724 ff. DOI logo
Eskildsen, Søren W.
2019. Learning Behaviors in the Wild: How People Achieve L2 Learning Outside of Class. In Conversation Analytic Research on Learning-in-Action [Educational Linguistics, 38], ► pp. 105 ff. DOI logo
Eskildsen, Søren W.
2021. Doing the Daily Routine: Development of L2 Embodied Interactional Resources Through a Recurring Classroom Activity. In Classroom-based Conversation Analytic Research [Educational Linguistics, 46], ► pp. 71 ff. DOI logo
Eskildsen, Søren W., Simona Pekarek Doehler, Arja Piirainen-Marsh & John Hellermann
2019. Introduction: On the Complex Ecology of Language Learning ‘in the Wild’. In Conversation Analytic Research on Learning-in-Action [Educational Linguistics, 38], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Lilja, Niina, Arja Piirainen-Marsh, Brendon Clark & Nicholas B. Torretta
2019. The Rally Course: Learners as Co-designers of Out-of-Classroom Language Learning Tasks. In Conversation Analytic Research on Learning-in-Action [Educational Linguistics, 38], ► pp. 219 ff. DOI logo
Filipi, Anna
2018. Chapter 10. Making teacher talk comprehensible through language alternation practices. In Conversation Analysis and Language Alternation [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 295], ► pp. 183 ff. DOI logo
Filipi, Anna & Numa Markee
2018. Chapter 11. From research to applications. In Conversation Analysis and Language Alternation [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 295], ► pp. 205 ff. DOI logo
Filipi, Anna & Numa Markee
2018. Chapter 1. Transitions in the language classroom as important sites for language alternation. In Conversation Analysis and Language Alternation [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 295], ► pp. 3 ff. DOI logo
Gafaranga, Joseph
2018. Chapter 3. Overall order versus local order in bilingual conversation. In Conversation Analysis and Language Alternation [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 295], ► pp. 35 ff. DOI logo
Giang Lam, Hoang Thi
2018. Chapter 8. Recurring patterns of language alternation practices by EFL novice teachers in Vietnam. In Conversation Analysis and Language Alternation [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 295], ► pp. 149 ff. DOI logo
Kunitz, Silvia
2018. Chapter 6. L1/L2 alternation practices in students’ task planning. In Conversation Analysis and Language Alternation [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 295], ► pp. 107 ff. DOI logo
Morton, Tom & Natalia Evnitskaya
2018. Chapter 4. Language alternation in peer interaction in content and language integrated learning (CLIL). In Conversation Analysis and Language Alternation [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 295], ► pp. 61 ff. DOI logo
Musk, Nigel & Jakob Cromdal
2018. Chapter 2. Analysing bilingual talk. In Conversation Analysis and Language Alternation [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 295], ► pp. 15 ff. DOI logo
Reichert, Tetyana & Grit Liebscher
2018. Chapter 7. Transitions with “Okay”. In Conversation Analysis and Language Alternation [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 295], ► pp. 129 ff. DOI logo
Stoewer, Kirsten
2018. Chapter 5. What is it in Swedish?. In Conversation Analysis and Language Alternation [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 295], ► pp. 83 ff. DOI logo
Tran, Huong Quynh
2018. Chapter 9. Language alternation during L2 classroom discussion tasks. In Conversation Analysis and Language Alternation [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 295], ► pp. 165 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2018. Conversation Analysis and Language Alternation [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 295], DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 9 october 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.