Practices for initial recognitional reference and learning opportunities in conversation

Kim, Younhee

doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2012.02.005

Cited by 34 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Even though this is not an activity whose prime focus is pedagogic in the way that the picture or object naming activity is in Extract 1, nonetheless it provides a good example of how any occasion in interactions with the very young offers an opportunity to work on language, particularly when the child shows some kind of continued embodied engagement. Similar shifts in language have also been described by Kim (2012) in the interactions of adolescents.…”

Section: Analysis and Discussionsupporting

confidence: 78%

“…Shifts in language may occur in response to a lexical problem that acts as a trigger (Kim, 2012;Koshik & Seo, 2012) or because the languages are shared between participants as sets of resources that are drawn on in interacting with each other (Cheng, 2013;Neville & Wagner, 2011). This extract provides an example of bilingual resources being deployed at a very early stage in life.…”

Section: Analysis and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Development of Recipient Design in Bilingual Child-Parent Interaction

Filipi

2015

Research on Language and Social Interaction

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article explores the development of the language alternation practices of a bilingual child who is growing up with two languages: English, which she speaks with her father and older brother, and Italian, which she speaks with her mother. It reports on a microanalysis of the dyadic interactions between parent and child when the child was aged 18-24 months. The analyses focus on how and when parent and child attend to language alternation as they interact with each other in everyday contexts such as mealtimes, shared book reading, and play. The results of this study frame simultaneous bilingualism as a matter of the local situated concerns of the participants that can nonetheless have a developmental focus. The data are in Australian English and Italian.

show abstract

Section: Analysis and Discussionsupporting

confidence: 78%

Section: Analysis and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Development of Recipient Design in Bilingual Child-Parent Interaction

Filipi

2015

Research on Language and Social Interaction

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Since call for more research on the characteristics of L2 interaction as a topic in its own right, there has been a growing interest in how second language speakers orient to language learning in everyday conversations outside the classroom (e.g. Brouwer 2003, Kurhila 2006, Hosoda 2006, Theodórsdóttir 2011, Kim 2012, Lilja 2014, Wagner 2015. This study contributes to this line of research and expands it by investing a new type of data from a multilingual workplace.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…Acceptance is often signaled by repeating the suggested word and adding a confirmation token (Kim 2012). Sometimes the word is also integrated in the completion of the original utterance-in-progress (Lerner 1996).…”

Section: Word Search Sequencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“What’s it called in Norwegian?” Acquiring L2 vocabulary items in the workplace

Svennevig

2018

Journal of Pragmatics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Conversely, knowledge checks are used among L1 speakers when an epistemic domain and its associated register is not (or less) available to a co‐participant (Kitzinger & Mandelbaum, ). The same practice is employed in conversations‐for‐learning (Kim, , ) to achieve intersubjectivity, and it also makes the epistemic object available as potential learning object.…”

Section: Expanding the Databasementioning

confidence: 99%

Epistemological Reorientations and L2 Interactional Settings: A Postscript to the Special Issue

Kasper

Wagner

2018

The Modern Language Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This postscript discusses the contributions of the four articles in this issue to the field and positions them in relation to other studies in recent CA research on L2. The articles focus on the two arenas for L2 learning: the classroom and the lifeworld of learners. These arenas are widely different from each other and equally so within with respect to organization and participation frameworks and the social practices deployed; but the interactional problems that participants confront inside and outside of the classroom partially overlap. Learning and teaching objects (or 'learnables') are brought into being by the participants through their joint actions, at particular moments in the ongoing activity, be it in a classroom or a situation in the lifeworld. The four articles re-specify standard SLA concepts in interactional terms: attention and noticing (Kunitz, 2018, this issue), corrective feedback (Majlesi, 2018, this issue), negotiation of/for meaning (Eskildsen, 2018, this issue), and corrections and metalinguistic explanations (Theodórsdóttir, 2018, this issue). Their re-specification adds value to these concepts because it furnishes them with a publicly visible interactional grounding and shows in each case how linguistic items become objects for reflexive linguistic practices by the participants.

show abstract

Practices for initial recognitional reference and learning opportunities in conversation

Cited by 34 publications

References 21 publications

The Development of Recipient Design in Bilingual Child-Parent Interaction

The Development of Recipient Design in Bilingual Child-Parent Interaction

“What’s it called in Norwegian?” Acquiring L2 vocabulary items in the workplace

Epistemological Reorientations and L2 Interactional Settings: A Postscript to the Special Issue

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About