Cover not available
Article published In:
Spoken Interaction Studies in Australia
Edited by Rod Gardner
[Australian Review of Applied Linguistics. Series S 11] 1994
► pp. 137–152

Preference organisation in teacher-supervisor talk

| University of Melbourne
This paper uses conversation analysis to examine a feedback session between a postgraduate student of TESOL and a university supervisor who had just watched her lesson. The feedbacsk session seemed unsatisfactory to the supervisor and the analysis suggests that this could have been due to the role of trainee being resisted by the teacher. Evidence for this in the talk is examined in detail, in particular the number and shape of dispreferred responses found. It would seem that the rules of ordinary conversation may influence these feedback sessions just as much as the conventions connected with the institutional setting of the talk.
Published online: 1 January 1994
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/aralss.11.07tay
References (13)
References
Brown, P., S. Levinson (1987) Politeness. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gardner, R. (1993) On some apparently anomalous uses of Mm in a corpus of Australian English: Mm as a prior turn completer. Paper presented at the 18th annual ALAA conference, Adelaide, October, 1993.
Gebhard, J. and A. Malicka (1991) Creative behaviour in teacher supervision. Prospect 6,3:40–59.Google Scholar
Hammond, J. (1990) Teacher expertise and learner responsibility in literacy development. Prospect 5,3:39–51.Google Scholar
Heritage, J. (1989) Current developments in conversation analysis. In D. Roger, and P. Bull (eds) Conversation: an interdisciplinary perspective. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
(1993) Advice and consent: Health visitors and first time mothers. Seminar paper presented at the University of Melbourne, September 16th 1993.
Jefferson, G. (1993) Caveat speaker: preliminary notes on recipient topic-shift implicature. Research on Language and Social Interaction 26,1:1–30. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levinson, S. (1983) Pragmatics. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pomerantz, A. (1984) Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In J. Atkinson and J. Heritage (eds) Structures of social action. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Sacks, H. (1987) On the preference for agreement and contiguity in sequences in conversation. In G. Button and J. Lee (eds) Talk and social organization. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Schegloff, E. (1982) Discourse as an interactional achievement: Some uses of ‘uh huh’ and other things that come between sentences. In D. Tannen, (ed.) Analyzing discourse :Text and talk. Washington: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Wajnryb, R. (1992) Learning to help – An exploration into supervisory behaviour. Prospect 7,3:32–41.Google Scholar
(1994) Pragmatics and supervisory discourse: Matching method and purpose. Prospect 9, 1:29–38.Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Keng Wee Ong, Kenneth
2011. Disagreement, confusion, disapproval, turn elicitation and floor holding: Actions as accomplished by ellipsis marks-only turns and blank turns in quasisynchronous chats. Discourse Studies 13:2 ► pp. 211 ff. DOI logo
Boyle, Ronald
2000. Whatever happened to preference organisation?. Journal of Pragmatics 32:5 ► pp. 583 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 2 september 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.