7.3.2 Tenor:Interpersonal Relationship of Speech R...
The interpersonal relationship of tenor examines the dynamic negotiation of disciplinary speech roles in classroom interaction.It offers a detailed insight to explore how the disciplinary identities construction is represented in terms of registerial variable of tenor that is instantiated in the system of interpersonal meanings, SPEECH FUNCTION.For the interpersonal meaning, following Eggins and Slade’s (2004) analytical approach, the identification focuses on the system of MOOD, including declarative, yes/no interrogative, wh-interrogative and imperative, and their meanings represented in modal adjunct, modalisation and modulation.
Analysis of the system of SPEECH FUNCTION provides a dynamic overview of the speech role structures constituted in the process of interpersonal negotiation.Structurally, it is realised in the mood patterns.The subsections below explain the analytical tools and procedures for manually coding the grammatical patterns in the four classroom discourse texts in this study, and all the extracts presented are taken from the texts.What should also be pointed out here is that these analytical tools were not randomly selected; rather, they emerged from the various SFG analytical results and revealed the most salient difference between the grammatical patterns in the four classroom discourse texts.In accordance with the analytical procedures and results, these tools are explained as follows.
7.3.2.1 Mood Patterns
Mood patterns display speech roles in the classroom discourse in this study.The interpersonal structure of social relationship in interaction are largely realised by mood selection at the clause level.Mood constructs the clause types like declarative, interrogative, and imperative, and their patterns realise the interpersonal meanings through the use of Subject, Finite, Modality and Polarity.
Subject and Finite in clauses are the two basic elements that constitute Mood choices.The interactants in dialogue enact speech roles and exchange messages by giving or demanding either information or goods and services.The Subject specifies who or what is responsible for or realise an offer or a demand in interaction, while the Finite specifies the process or state of an event that entails the possibility to argue or negotiate about the Subject.The relationship between Subject and Finite is pivotal in defining the interactive event that takes place.Sometimes, Modal Adjuncts are used in clauses to add meaning to the Subject or Finite and make the mood choices negotiable.
7.3.2.1.1 Subject
The Subject is typically a nominal element (a single noun, a pronoun, or a nominal group), such as those in bold, ‘He’, ‘people’, ‘it’, and ‘normal people’, in Extract 7.2 as follows:
Extract 7.2 The Subjects and Finites from Y3 Chinese student clauses
But the Subject possibly can be a clause in itself, as ‘what we are going to do’ in Extract 7.3:
Extract 7.3 The Subjects from the Y3 teacher clause
7.3.2.1.2 Finite
Finite is a verbal element, demonstrating tense (past, present, future) and modality (likely or unlikely; desirable or undesirable).Therefore, as shown in Table 7.2, the action occurred in an interactive event can be expressed by the temporal operators and modal operators.
Table 7.2 Finite verbal operators and Modal operators
(from Halliday & Matthiessen, 2014, p.145)
Continued
Modality is an interpersonal resource used to ‘temper or qualify’ (Eggins & Slade, 2004, p.74) an interactant’s discursive meanings associated with the Mood element in two ways, namely, modalisation and modulation.In SFG, modalisation is concerned with probability and usuality, which are realised in propositions (i.e., statements and questions); modulation is concerned with obligation and readiness, which are realised in proposals (i.e., offers and commands).As demonstrated in Table 7.3, these kinds of modality can be expressed either as a Finite or as a mood Adjunct.
Table 7.3 Kinds of Modality (from Martin, Matthiessen & Painter, 2010, p.63)
Polarity of positive and negative is another feature lied in between the choice of tense and modality, indicating whether an interactant accepts or refuses a proposition or a proposal.The realisation of Finite then occurs in the temporal operators of did/didn’t, does/doesn’t, will/won’t, or modal operators of can/needn’t, should/shouldn’t, must/mustn’t.The examples can refer to those underlined and italic in Extract 7.2.
7.3.2.1.3 Mood Clause Types
Identifying Mood clause types in spoken discourse is important to interpret the social relationships construed in the meanings of lexicogrammatical patterns and speech functions.The Mood clause types are based on the Subject and the Finite and how they structurally link with other elements in clauses.As mentioned in subsection 7.3.1.1.1, the major clause is the only one that carries the Mood elements of Subject and Finite, while the elliptical clause may or may not carry the Mood elements, and the minor clause carries no Mood elements.
For analysing discursive conversation, Eggins and Slade (2004) summarise eleven basic Mood types in verbal clauses, that is, full declarative, elliptical declarative, full imperative, elliptical imperative, full wh-interrogative, elliptical wh-interrogative, full yes/no (polar) interrogative, elliptical yes/no (polar) interrogative, full exclamative, elliptical exclamative, and minor.The examples of these mood types are in Table 7.4.
Table 7.4 Basic mood types (modified from Eggins & Slade, 2004, p.75)
7.3.2.2 Speech Function Moves
The synoptic analysis of Chinese students’ classroom discourse at the lexicogrammatical level is insufficient to examine how they differently enact their own disciplinary identities and establish social relationships in interaction.Halliday (1994) proposes that interaction is a process of meaning exchange, and the interactants involved decide the commodity to be exchanged (information or goods and services) and take on speech roles (giving or demanding).An interactant is normally supposed to take an initiating role to start the conversation and the other will take a responding role to interact.Yet the dynamic turn-taking in dialogue implies that there are more speaking moves and speech roles will be taken on to, for example, support or challenge, agree or disagree the prior commodities.
Halliday (1994) identifies certain basic speech functions in interaction, namely, statement, question, offer, command, acceptance, compliance, acknowledgement, answer, rejection, refusal, contraction and disclaimer.He suggests that these speech functions are related to the context of situation which realises them; for example, interaction in a chat or a classroom discourse will be instated with different speech functions due to the different discourse purposes.Eggins and Slade (2004) refine the previous work (cf.Berry, 1981a, 1981b, 1981c; Martin, 1992; Halliday, 1994; Halliday & Matthiessen, 2014) on the speech functions by presenting a much more dynamic analysis structure.
Moves manifest the discourse patterns of speech functions.Eggins and Slade (2004) refer to a move as ‘a unit after which speaker change could occur without turn transfer being seen as an interruption’ (p.186).It therefore is ‘a separate unit from the clause’ (ibid.) that organises discourse, but not grammar.But meanwhile moves and clauses are dependent on each other; moves can be realised through one or more clauses through moves.
To identify a move, Eggins and Slade (2004) suggest two criteria should be considered together, that is, 1) the grammatical unit, whether the clause is a dependent or independent one with the selection of Mood elements, and 2) turn-taking, whether the end of the clause indicates the end of a rhythmic or intonational unit.First, those clauses that are grammatically subordinated to a main clause are not treated as moves, including dependent clauses, embedded clauses, direct and indirect quoting or reporting clauses.Second, a run-on will occur when a speaker tries to delay turn-transfer and avoid losing the turn, and then the included clauses will be treated as a single move because of no rhythmic or intonational break between them.But in a subordinated structure, if there is no run-on where the first major clause is followed by the second subordinate one and meanwhile the speaker intonationally stops after the first clause, then both two clauses are considered as a single move.
To code moves in conversations, Eggins and Slade (2004) introduce the speech function labels for the classes of opening, continuing, responding, and rejoinder.The current study employs these labels to analyse the dynamic patterns of interactive events and speech role structures in the classroom discourse.The following subsections will review the functions of moves of these classes.
7.3.2.2.1 Opening Speech Functions
Opening moves initiate negotiation of Mood elements in interaction around a discourse purpose, which indicates whether a speaker seeks attention, or either gives or demands information or goods and services.Hence, the opening move options consist of attending and initiating.Attending moves are normally realised by minor or formulaic clauses to make salutations, greetings or calls.Initiating moves set up the basis for interaction where the speaker exerts certain degree of control on the other’s discourse choices.Eggins and Slade (2004) add the speech functions of fact and opinion for both statements and questions.Facts are usually realised through lexis to state factual information; while opinions are expressed through modality or appraising lexis.The examples and the speech function coding labels for opening moves are shown in Table 7.5 below.
Table 7.5 Speech function coding labels for opening moves (from Eggins & Slade, 2004, p.194)
Continued
7.3.2.2.2 Sustaining:Continuing Speech Functions
Sustaining moves keep the negotiation of Mood constituents established in the prior initiation.Continuing and reacting are two subsystems of sustaining moves, and they are realised either by the speaker who initiates the interaction or by the other(s) who take(s) the speaking turn.Reacting moves include responding and rejoinder moves, which will be explained in the next two subsections.
Continuing moves can be used to monitor, prolong or append the initiator’s discourse.Prolonging and appending moves express the relationship between the first move and the following one(s).The list of speech functions, discourse purposes and the corresponding mood selections for coding continuing moves is shown in Table 7.6.
Table 7.6 Speech function coding labels for sustaining:continuing moves
(from Eggins & Slade, 2004, p.201)
7.3.2.2.3 Reacting:Responding Speech Functions
Responding moves occur when a different speaker takes a turn to react to the previous moves.They are the reactions that lead the exchange to a completion, either supporting or confronting the previous moves.But meanwhile they include a possibility to open up a new discussion.Supporting moves contain four main categories:developing, engaging, registering and replying.
Developing moves imply the new speaker accepts the previous moves, being realised through elaborating, extending or enhancing what has been said.First, developing:elaborate moves sometimes use interpersonal conjunctions like I mean, I think or for example to expand the previous ones through the way of restating, clarifying or exemplifying.Therefore, developing:elaborate moves are usually realised through non-elliptical clauses.Second, developing:extend moves are produced by the new speaker to add more supporting or contrasting contributions to the previous ones, sometimes being initiated by the conjunctions such as and, but, on the other hand.Third, developing:enhance moves are realised by the new speaker to expand the contributions by adding a temporal, casual or conditional qualification to what has been said.
As to the last three main categories, engaging moves show the different speaker’s willingness to interact by responding to, for example, salutations, with a minor clause, typically ‘yea’ or matched response; registering moves display the different speaker’s attention to the previous ones, by either repeating the speaker’s word(s) or reacting with minor clauses like ‘Mmm’ or ‘Oh’; replying moves support or confront the proposition produced by the previous speaker, by using either non-verbal expressions or elliptically subordinate verbal clauses where the Subject and Finite are generated from the previous moves.Replying moves are ‘the most negotiatory of the responding reactions’ (Eggins & Slade, 2004, p.205); they can be realised by different subcategories, as summarised in Table 7.7:complying, accepting, agreeing, acknowledging, answering, affirming, disagreeing, non-complying, withholding, disavowing, and contradicting.
Table 7.7 Speech function coding labels for replying moves
(from Eggins & Slade, 2004, p.208)
Continued
7.3.2.2.4 Reacting:Rejoinder Speech Functions
Rejoinder moves interrupt, postpone, abort or suspend the exchange sequences underway.Rather than accepting and closing the exchange in reacting:responding moves, reacting:rejoinder moves tend to challenge, query or reject what has been said by either demanding further details or offering alternative explanations.These rejoinder resources enable an interaction to be sustained beyond a simplified sequence of Initiation ^ Response.
Rejoinder moves can be supporting or confronting to track or challenge the negotiable elements.Tracking moves are used by a speaker to check, confirm, clarify or probe the information (mis)heard.Challenging moves are used by a speaker to detach from the interaction, rebound to question the veracity of the previous moves, or counter to negate the understanding of the previous moves.Both tracking moves and challenging moves will or will not be followed by response, specifically, of resolving, repairing or acquiescing to tracking moves, and of unresolving, refuting or re-challenging to challenging moves.The list of rejoinder speech functions, discourse purposes and corresponding mood selections is demonstrated in Table 7.8.
Table 7.8 Speech function coding labels for rejoinder moves (from Eggins & Slade, 2004, p.213)
