Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
PSZ 19:16 (Pind. 1/07)
DECLARATION OF THESIS / POSTGRADUATE PROJECT PAPER AND COPYRIGHT
Author’s full name : SAFAWATI BASIRAH BINTI ZAID Date of birth : 15 JANUARY 1988 Title : ESL INTERACTIONAL FEATURES IN NEGOTIATION TASK
Academic Session : 2010/2011 SEMESTER I I declare that this thesis is classified as: I acknowledged that Universiti Teknologi Malaysia reserves the right as follows:
1. The thesis is the property of Universiti Teknologi Malaysia. 2. The Library of Universiti Teknologi Malaysia has the right to make copies for the purpose
of research only. 3. The Library has the right to make copies of the thesis for academic exchange.
Certified by:
SIGNATURE SIGNATURE OF SUPERVISOR 880115-11-5376 ASS.PROF.DR.MOHAMAD HASSAN ZAKARIA (NEW IC NO. /PASSPORT NO.) NAME OF SUPERVISOR
Date: Date:
NOTES : * If the thesis is CONFIDENTIAL or RESTRICTED, please attach with the letter from the organisation with period and reasons for confidentiality or restriction.
UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MALAYSIA
CONFIDENTIAL (Contains confidential information under the Official Secret Act 1972)*
RESTRICTED (Contains restricted information as specified by the organisation where research was done)*
OPEN ACCESS I agree that my thesis to be published as online open access (full text)
A-PDF Merger DEMO : Purchase from www.A-PDF.com to remove the watermark
ESL INTERACTIONAL FEATURES IN NEGOTIATION TASK
SAFAWATI BASIRAH BINTI ZAID
A project report submitted in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the award of the degree of
Master of Education (TESL)
Faculty of Education
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia
NOVEMBER 2010
ii
I declare that this thesis entitled “ESL Interactional Features in Negotiation Task” is the
result of my own research except as cited in the references. The thesis has not been
accepted for any degree and is not concurrently submitted in candidature of any other
degree.
Signature : ....................................................
Name : SAFAWATI BASIRAH BINTI ZAID
Date :
iii
I hereby declare that I have read this thesis and in my
opinion this thesis is sufficient in terms of scope and quality for the
award of the Master of Education (TESL)
Signature : ....................................................
Name of Supervisor : ASS. PROF. DR. MOHAMAD HASSAN BIN ZAKARIA
Date :
iv
...To those I love most…
Dearest father and mother,
Zaid b. Jusoh
Ramlah bt. Mohamad
And my siblings,
Khairul Amin
Ahmad Naim
Ahmad Saiful Bahri
Humaira Aisyah
v
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First and foremost, I want to pay tribute to the ceaseless help, support,
forbearance and meaningful advice of my papa; Zaid Jusoh and my umi; Ramlah
Mohamad. I love you both.
Next, I am indebted to this great person; Ass.Prof.Dr.Mohamad Hassan Zakaria
whom without his enthusiastic support, guidance, ideas and help throughout the year,
I’m going to face difficulties with this master project. Thank you.
Special thanks are given to all the students of Effective Oral Communication
Skills class who participate in this study and willing to cooperate well. Special gratitude
is also given for my dear friends; Mahfuzah Binti Rafek and Najah Binti Ramlan for the
help that they gave me whenever I need it. Also for my fellow course mates who have
supported me along the process of completing this study. Without these people this
thesis could not have been written. I can only hope that they will all look upon the
results of their influence and endeavours with pleasure.
Thank you so much everyone and may Allah bless us all. Insya-Allah.
vi
ABSTRACT
SLA researchers have given much attention to investigating the role that
interactions play in second language learning. The findings demonstrate that interactions
bring about language acquisition in which it integrates the elements of negotiation of
meaning such as to receive comprehensible input, provide feedback on form and
meaning, and assist in the production of modified output. However, interactional
features are seldom studied particularly in negotiation task in ESL classrooms.
Therefore, this study aims to identify the salient interactional features used in
negotiation tasks, the implemented strategies, the problems occurred while negotiating
and also speaker factors contributing to the interaction features produced. This paper
reports a situational observation of the interactional features produced by ESL learners
engaged in the negotiation tasks planned and created by them beforehand. Twenty-six
students are divided into five different groups with mixed ability. The method leans
heavily on transcriptions and analysis of open-ended questionnaires. In this study, it is
found that ESL learners employ compromising and bargaining features the most. They
come across major problems such as loss of words and ideas and also being
overshadowed by proficient learners. Besides, while negotiating, students are found to
implement corroboration and turn taking strategies. Finally, the factors that may have
accounted for the features produced are learners’ proficiency, personality, attitude and
motivation.
vii
ABSTRAK
Penyelidikan di bidang pengukuhan bahasa kedua lebih terarah kepada peranan
interaksi dalam pengukuhan bahasa kedua. Hasil kajian mendapati interaksi membantu
proses pengukuhan bahasa kerana ia melibatkan unsur perbincangan seperti mendapat
pemahaman awal, bertindak balas terhadap komen dan bantuan dalam membaikpulih
hasil. Namun begitu, kajian ini terbatas dan tidak merangkumi aktiviti perbincangan di
dalam kelas pengukuhan bahasa kedua. Oleh itu, kajian ini bertujuan untuk mengkaji
apakah ciri-ciri interaksi yang ketara digunakan dalam aktiviti perbincangan, strategi
yang diaplikasikan, masalah-masalah yang timbul ketika berbincang serta faktor
mengapa pelajar menggunakan aspek perbincangan tersebut. Kajian ini melibatkan
pemerhatian di dalam kelas terhadap aspek perbincangan yang digunakan oleh pelajar.
Terdapat dua puluh enam pelajar terlibat dan dibahagikan mengikut campuran
kebolehan. Antara kaedah kajian yang terlibat adalah transkripsi dan analisis catatan
pelajar. Hasil kajian mendapati aspek perbincangan yang paling kerap digunakan adalah
bertolak ansur dan tawar menawar. Pelajar juga mengalami masalah ketika berbincang
seperti ketandusan idea dan dibayangi oleh pelajar yang lebih hebat. Selain itu, pelajar
juga menggunakan strategi seperti berkelakuan meyakinkan dan bertukar giliran ketika
berbincang. Akhir sekali, faktor yang menyebabkan terhasilnya aspek perbincangan
adalah termasuk kefasihan pelajar, personaliti, persepsi diri dan juga motivasi.
viii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER TITLE PAGE
DECLARATION ii
DEDICATION iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS v
ABSTRACT vi
ABSTRAK vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS viii
LIST OF TABLES xii
LIST OF FIGURES xiii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS xiv
LIST OF APPENDICES
xv
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Introduction
1.2 Background of the Study
1.3 Statements of the Problem
1.4 Purposes of the Study
1.5 Objectives of the Study
1.6 Research Questions
1.7 Significance of the Study
1
2
5
7
8
8
9
ix
1.8 Scope of the Study
1.9 Definitions of Key Concepts
1.9.1 Interactional Features in Negotiation
1.9.2 Mixed Ability Group of ESL Speakers
1.9.3 Group Discussion
1.9.4 Negotiation Task
1.9.5 Speaker Factors
10
10
10
11
11
12
12
2 LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction
2.2 Negotiation: An Overview
2.3 Interactional Features in Negotiation
2.4 Speaking Tasks
2.5 Classroom Discourse
2.6 Group Discussion of ESL Speakers
2.7 L1 in L2 Learning
2.8 Interlanguage Talk
2.9 Sociolinguistics Theory
2.10 Nonverbal Behavior in Negotiation
2.11 Teacher’s Role in Group Negotiation
2.12 Related Research............................
13
14
16
18
20
22
25
31
31
34
36
38
3 RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
3.1 Introduction
3.2 Research Design
3.3 Subjects of Study
3.4 Research Instruments
40
41
42
43
x
3.5 The Transcription
3.6 Data Collection
3.7 Role of Researcher
3.8 Data Analysis
44
46
47
49
4 FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS
4.1 Introduction
4.2 Transcriptions Interpretation
4.2.1 Transcription 1
4.2.2 Transcription 2
4.2.3 Transcription 3
4.2.4 Transcription 4
4.2.5 Transcription 5
4.3 Open-ended Questionnaires Analyses
4.3.1 Question 1
4.3.2 Question 2
4.3.3 Question 3
4.3.4 Question 4
4.3.5 Question 5
4.3.6 Question 6
4.3.7 Question 7
4.4 Discussion
4.4.1 The Salient Interactional Features Used in
Negotiation
4.4.1.1 Starting a Negotiation
4.4.1.2 Requesting for Information and
Responding to Request for Information
4.4.1.3 Compromising
4.4.1.4 Interruptions
51
52
52
56
58
60
64
68
68
69
70
71
72
74
75
76
76
76
77
79
80
xi
4.4.1.5 Feedback
4.4.1.6 Humour
4.4.1.7 Gaining Agreement on Outcomes
4.4.1.8 Nonverbal Interactional Features
4.4.2 Strategies Implemented in Negotiation
4.4.2.1 Corroboration
4.4.2.2 Turn Taking
4.4.2.3 Repairs
4.4.3 Problems in Negotiation
4.4.3.1 Loss of Ideas and Words
4.4.3.2 Overshadowed by Proficient Speaker
4.4.3.3 Initiating Talk
4.4.3.4 The la, ceh, ha, eh, cewah, tuh, haish, heh,
haiya Particles.
4.4.4 Speaker Factors Contributing to the Features
Produced
4.4.4.1 Personality
4.4.4.2 Proficiency
4.4.4.3 Motivation
4.4.4.4 Attitude
81
82
83
84
86
86
87
88
89
89
92
93
94
96
96
98
100
101
5
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Introduction
5.2 Summary of Findings
5.3 Implications of the Findings
5.3.1 Oral communication skills course
5.3.2 The ESL Teacher
5.3.3 ESL Students
5.4 Limitations of the Study
104
104
106
106
107
108
108
xii
5.5 Recommendations for Future Research
5.6 Conclusion
109
110
REFERENCES
111
APPENDICES 129
xiii
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE NO.
TITLE PAGE
3.1
3.2
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
The punctuations and their notations
The fillers and their notations
Responses on Question 1
Responses on Question 2
Responses on Question 3
Responses on Question 4
Responses on Question 5
Responses on Question 6
Responses on Question 7
45
45
68
69
70
71
72
74
75
xiv
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE NO.
TITLE PAGE
2.1
2.2
3.1
A Model of Interaction
Interpersonal Communication Transaction Model
Research Design
18
26
48
xv
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
ESL - English as Second Language
UTM - Universiti Teknologi Malaysia
xvi
LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX
TITLE PAGE
A
B
Transcription of group 1,2,3,4 and 5
Responses on Open-ended Questionnaires
1
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Introduction
In this introductory chapter, the conceptual background of the research will be
made explicit so as to provide an overview of key issues concerning interactional
features in negotiation task in second language learning as well as the speaker factors in
the production of those features in the task. What is intended by the term interactional
features, mixed ability group of ESL speaker, group discussion and negotiation task as it
is used in this research will also be explained.
2
1.2 Background of the Study
There has been an amazing amount of progress in research in the field of second
language acquisition, especially in interaction research. Hatch (1978) began the era of
interactional research by proposing ‘language learning evolves out of learning how to
carry on conversations, out of learning how to communicate’. Long (1981) continued the
work by suggesting that one of the necessary and sufficient conditions for SLA would be
participation in conversation with native speakers by modification of interaction. In his
later research, Long (1983) once again signified that when interaction took place, the
linguistic and conversational adjustment that occurred would promote language learning
This was because of the conversational adjustment in interaction that helped making
input more comprehensible and facilitate L2 learning.
This study would also interested to focus on learners’ interaction while
negotiating in which they would adapt several ways for negotiation of meaning. In terms
of negotiation of meaning, Varonis and Gass (1989) found that learners utilized more
negotiation sequence under conditions where there was mismatch between them in either
proficiency or L1 knowledge. Both Varonis and Gass, back in 1985 had examined the
issue of student-centered learning that evidently helped in language acquisition. They
came out with acceptable hypothesis where they concluded that learners performed
better in student-centered learning strategy in which during learner-learner conversation,
less face-threat shown by participants because of their equal status as language learners.
Their study clearly showed that negotiation of meaning was part of language learning
strategy, particularly in learner-learner interactions. The more negotiation took place, the
higher chances for target language development.
Conversation involving speakers whose first language was not the target
language had became widespread in today’s globalized world. However, earlier
researchers did not take into account of L1 interference in language acquisition. For
instance, Lado (Lightbrown & Spada, 2001) introduced the Contrastive Analysis
3
Hypothesis (CAH) in which it proposed that there were a clear distinction between a
learner’s L1 and L2 and believed that the learner’s L1 did in fact affect the acquisition of
the L2, although very much negatively. Therefore, it was concluded that the learner
should not be exposed to his L1 during the language learning process as it would only
cause the learner to rely on his L1 instead of exerting himself in obtaining the target
language. Lado’s concept heavily influenced language classrooms when it was first
introduced, paving its way for various teaching methodologies that singled out the native
language, most significantly the Audiolingual Method (Brown, 2001). However,
overtime, criticism arose towards the unnatural isolation of the L1 with arguments
stemming from the fact that it is impossible for the learners to not refer to their L1 for
comparison or meaning purposes (Schweers, 2003; Mahmoud, 2006)). This also was
investigated in this study since all the subjects were expected to use their L1 while
interacting.
In terms of learners’ level of proficiency, many experts in second language
acquisition agreed with the fact that L1 had significant effect in teaching target language
especially for the low-proficiency ones. This could be viewed in research done by
Nation (2001), Swain & Lapkin (2000), Atkinson (1987) as well as Mattoli (2004).
Though all of them suggested that L1 played important roles in low-proficiency
learners’ language acquisition, there were still room for progression in this particular
field. To date, Ramachandran and Rahim (2004) investigated elementary level learners
on the effectiveness of using translation method, from L1 to L2, in their ability to recall
the meaning and retention of the words. Based on their findings, it was concluded that
L1 really helped in translation method in which recalling was better done with the help
of learners’ L1 rather than with no translation being used.
Problems in second language acquisition arose when teachers normally assumed
that English language should be totally been taught in English per say, ignoring the facts
that their students were of different level of proficiency and language background. They
believed that it is the only way to expose learners with target language thoroughly as
proposed by Weinberg (1990). This contradicts with Keomany’s (2006) who claimed in
4
his work that students barely showed any progression in vocabularies building because
the teachers taught English in English and this led to low achievement. In addition to
that, William (1999) also found that higher proficiency learners produced more
vocabularies compared to lower proficiency learners in language-related episodes when
he examined the effect of discussion form. He claimed that the results was as such
because lower proficiency learners tended to focus more on the conveyed message rather
than the form of discussion whereas higher proficiency learners were able to concentrate
to form in spontaneous talk. Thus, this study was interested to find the effect of
proficiency in the interactions between mixed ability learners.
Founded on the researches done, it could be concluded that students performed
better especially in speaking when there was learner-learner interaction, not learner-
teacher interaction. The nature of the learning activity would influence their learning
progression where they engaged more in activity-based teaching techniques such as
group discussion. They feel at ease when they were able to do negotiation of meaning
among themselves without the help of teachers and conversed freely with one another.
There has been an increase in the awareness of the effect of learner-learner
interactions regarding the language acquisition and learning processes. However there
was no research conducted specifically related to negotiation tasks. As denoted by Neale
and Northcraft (1991), there were several key components involved in a negotiation
namely the negotiators, their interests, their alternatives, the process as well as the
negotiated outcomes. Hence, there was need to further investigate on to what extend
negotiation tasks could affect the interactions as well as the effect of learners’
proficiency on negotiation task.
5
1.3 Statement of the Problem
The researcher was motivated to embark on this study realizing that problems
with proficiency among English learners in Malaysia can be attributed to ineffective
teaching approach, specifically on speaking task conducted in the classroom. Due to
syllabus, classroom and time constraints the importance of learner interaction could
simply be overlooked by teachers. Interaction features need to be studied as they
informed teachers many crucial aspects that contribute to proficiency. The students were
hoped to be proficient enough and able to, at least speak confidently in English so that
they could come forward to promote themselves especially during jobs hunting.
Teaching English in Malaysian schools and universities was still characterized
by teacher-centeredness. One very promising and viable solution to this problem was by
making the students realized of the qualities of good language speakers. This would help
them to understand ‘the tricks of the trade’ and thus making them better speakers. When
the students knew how to manage their own learning they would be able to loosen the
grip of dependency on their teachers and develop a sense of autonomy. Teachers could
develop this element by having group discussion frequently among students.
Considering the potential benefits of learner-learner interactions in ESL
classrooms and the lack of attention given on such interactions in typical Malaysian
classrooms, the researcher was interested to investigate the speaking activities
conducted in group discussion. The researcher thought that students would learn better
in communicative environment and in a learner-learner interaction. Ideally, this was
because in order to extend learners’ competence in speaking, teachers should know
when to relax their control over the teaching process and give students chances to
practice talking without prompted to. Researcher was not trying to deny the importance
of teachers’ control over learning but it would limit language produced originally by the
learners. Besides that, learner-learner interaction provided negotiation of meaning
between them particularly in speaking tasks involving group discussion. This kind of
6
tasks enhanced each learner’s opportunity to speak and expectantly reduced the
psychological burden of public performance. However, due to the syllabus of UHB 3952
that integrated the element of negotiation, researcher was interested to study the
interactions between learners on this particular activity, not on normal group discussion
There were numerous studies conducted on conversational interaction in second
language acquisition, both in classroom and laboratory contexts that were consistent
with this particular study. Among them were Mackey (1999), Mackey and Philp (1998),
McDonough (2005), R.Ellis and He (1999), Lowen (2005), Muranoi (2000), and
Leeman(2003). All of them had provided L2 practitioner with important information
about the variables and types of interactional features that occurred during the
conversations but they had not address the influence of learners’ level of proficiency.
In interactions, specifically negotiations, proficiency was a prime element in
achieving its final outcome. Even the competent speakers might face difficulties in
utterances. Lower proficiency speakers, on the other hand, might not be highly
proficient in the language, but they were excellent in interactions. In other words, these
groups of speakers were able to engage fairly active in the interaction. It was not a
matter of perfection but more to have them felt confident to interact with each other and
formed a great deal of informal spontaneous talk. Realizing the fact that even competent
speakers would have obstacles to communication such as an inappropriate word choice,
an obscure term, and producing novel expression, the researcher was interested to
examine further on the effect of proficiency level in interactions, to be specific, on their
interactional features.
In addition to all above, interactions, specifically negotiations had their own
strategies in producing the final outcomes. Strategies or the approaches selected to
pursue objectives within a negation varied enormously from the simplest to the hardest.
These strategies also referred as tactics by Carnevale and Pruitt (1992). Learners were
predicted to use different strategies based on the negotiation types. It might be
7
cooperative strategies or competitive strategies that would soon be discovered in this
study.
Thompson (1990) identified the fact that in each negotiating process, verbal and
non-verbal features would be elicited. On realizing the importance of features in
negotiation, this research was directed at this in which it would examine some of the
negotiation features, both verbal and nonverbal and in particular their interactional
features. It was hoped to offer important insights into the process of negotiating of ESL
learners for the future improvement of the subject (UHB 3052).
Besides, this paper also set out to identify whether the inclusion of the learner’s
L1 within an L2 speaking task will serve as a tool or hindrance towards the language
learning process since the subjects were predicted to include L1 while interacting. It also
intended to explore on other learners’ factors that contribute to the success of speaking
activity.
1.4 Purpose of the Study
This particular research paper aimed to identify the salient interactional features
used in negotiation task among the low and intermediate proficiency ESL learners. It
also meant to examine the strategies implemented while negotiating as well as the
problems experienced by negotiators. Finally it was aimed to investigate speaker factors
contributing to the use of interactional features.
8
1.5 Objectives of the Study
a) To examine the salient interactional features used by the speakers during
negotiation tasks
b) To identify the strategies involved in negotiation task of ESL speakers
c) To identify the problems experienced by ESL speakers while negotiating
d) To investigate speaker factors influencing the use of interactional features
of ESL speakers
1.6 Research Questions
To be more specific this study attempted to answer the following research
questions:
a) What are the salient interactional features used by the speakers during
negotiation tasks?
b) What are the strategies involved in negotiating of ESL speakers?
c) What are the problems experienced by ESL speakers in negotiation?
d) What are the speaker factors influencing the use of interactional features
of ESL speakers?
