Assignment 1 Exercise 3: Interpersonal Resources

Rayed Darwish

Student Number: 3589560

Submission date: 01/07/2011

To begin with, since we are in a classroom environment, vocatives the names we use with one another to establish and maintain relationships (EDGT976 Topic 10, p10) is a good starting point and an invaluable resource essential to the development of roles and relationships between teacher and student. Initially, we see Miss T. has developed a strong, confident, if not controlling attitude with respect to addressing her students via either the use of proper nouns or pronouns. For example, the terms class and children denote her students: What a lovely class, Alright children. The latter seems to indicate a definite mother-child relationship where teacher is ruler of all she surveys. Vocatives are interpersonally important in signalling qualities in the tenor of relationship between addresser (Miss T.) and addressee (students) (EDGT976 Topic 10, p10). So when questioning or commanding students, Miss T. mainly uses proper nouns to grab attention: (Kevin, would you.., Nguyen, out you come, I don't think we want to hear about that now, Claire). Miss T. seems to have a friend-like relationship with Penny by using a pet-name when asking her to close the door (Penny, honey). Pronouns are also used by Miss T., but this time to highlight and control inappropriate behaviour: I want to see you all sitting up straight, You, put the gum in the bin, And those boys up the back. This leads into how speech role pronouns that is, first and second person pronouns (EDGT976 Topic 10, p11) - are used in interaction to further establish and highlight tenor between teacher and students. By saying you to indicate her entire class, Miss T. attempts to firmly establish and assert her authoritive command over class behaviour and interaction. Also, once Miss T. has gathered information from a student by initially using their name, she continues with second person pronouns to further validate her line of authority - What have you got..., Have you been..., Off you go - thus further validating her sense of overall command. I will now apply mood and modality to highlight differing patterns of interaction, which in turn are expressed (or 'realised') by the resources (EDGT976 Topic 9, p5) found in this text. The mood system enables us to make statements, ask questions and make commands while modality is used to interact with others in a number of degrees based on probability, usuality, typicality, obviousness, obligation and inclination (Butt et.al 2000, p113).

Firstly, Miss T. demands much of her information from questions (interrogative mood). Note how the modal verbs will and would are used to temper questions to demand compliance and information: Kevin, would Finite + (modal) Mood Block close Predicator Residue the door Complement will Finite + (modal) Mood Block you Subject like Predicator Residue you? Subject to come Complement out the front? Adjunct

What WH-Complement Res-

will Finite+ (future) Mood Block

you Subject

see Predicator -idue

at the zoo? Adjunct

Miss T.s tone becomes more authoritive when she demands goods and services (attention and appropriate behaviour) through the imperative mood from her students. Typical of this exchange is that there is no apparent Subject or Finite, but speakers can...make demands more emphatic by adding a Subject or a Finite (Butt et al. 2000, p97). Eyes No Subject Mood Block People Subject Mood You, Subject No Finite Mood Block Nguyen, No Finite Complement Residue are Finite + (present) Block the gum Complement to the front. Adjunct

who WH-Complement Resput Predicator Residue out you

sitting Predicator -idue in the bin. Adjunct

come. 3

Complement Res-

Adjunct

Subject Mood Block

No Finite

Predicator -idue

The final interpersonal resource I shall employ is that of Attitudinal Lexis that is, how we stimulate a response when we use language to assert a point of view or opinion (EDGT976 Topic 10, p10). The following examples showcase just how assertive and opinionated Miss T. can be: What a lovely class, How exciting, That's terrific. Isn't he a lucky boy! That's nice, I don't think we want to hear about that now, Claire. Though the second and third examples highlight Miss T.s obligation to praise students for answering a question and a command (What have you got to tell us about? Tell us which animals you'll see.), it is her opinion and not that of the students that matters, thus limiting class involvement and interaction. This coincides with the fact that most of Miss T.s questions require little or no elaboration or imagination from her students. For example, Yes/No questions (Have you been to the zoo? Has he been here before?) are the most limiting, requiring a simple 'yes' or 'no' answer (EDGT976 Topic 9, p10) while closed questions (What have you got to tell us about? What will you see at the zoo? Tell us which animals you'll see (command)), all elicited constrained answers usually supplying a specific piece of information (EDGT976 Topic 9, p10): Lots of animals. My uncle is coming from Sydney. Thus we can ascertain that Miss T. may reserve doubts about her students ability to handle more complex answers (EDGT976 Topic 9, p10) while restricting potential class interaction pertaining to a specific topic. It is interesting to note what questions Miss T. did not ask to allow for a much greater exploration of ideas and challenge the learner to discuss in an open-ended way (EDGT976 Topic 9, p10): Why do you like going to the zoo? Tell us a little about your uncle, Nguyen. Who else would like to tell the class why they like the zoo? The fact such questions were not asked by Miss T. relates to her authoritive power in the almost strict mother-child relationship she has with her students who merely listen and acknowledge her presence in an interpersonal relationship more suited to one-way interaction than whole class involvement. Consequently, students stories were either not told or stifled by what appears to be Miss T.s incessant need to move the lesson along in a teacher-centred and dismissive approach. I don't think we want to hear about that now, Claire is a case in point. Here Claire is listening to Nguyen mention his uncle and wanted to add to the conversation. What is striking is not that 4

Miss T. does now allow her to elaborate (as she could have said, OK Claire, you can talk about your Uncle in a minute.), but the fact that she spoke in a personal tone that expressed not only her opinion but her indignation that Claires story may be inappropriate or downright rude! The mood here is not only a strong imperative as the mood tag would suggest (do we, Claire?) but a forceful modality (dont think) where it is very obvious that Claire cannot elaborate and therefore contribute to the conversation. The interpersonal grammar of interaction and tenor (Butt et al. 2000, p105) in this transcript regarding student and-teacher relationships are quite clear, if not startling. Interpersonal relations are initially and consequently negotiated my Miss T. in a teacher-centred learning environment where what she deems appropriate behaviour and knowledge is signified mainly via strong, imperative commands (You, put the gum in the bin. We don't chew gum here. And those boys up the back, stop the wriggling.), tempered questioning (Kevin, would you like to come out the front? close the door will you?) and dismissive imperatives based on personal opinion (I don't think we want to hear about that now, Claire). And though there was some leeway allowing children to tell their story (I'll see giraffes ... and elephants ... and tigers ... and ... and we're going on a ferry..., My uncle is coming to Sydney.), such discourse was restrained as time to imagine and thus further elaborate was discouraged.

Reference Butt, D, Fahey, R, Feez, Spinks, S & Yallop, C 2000, Using Functional Grammar: An Explorers Guide, 2nd edn, Macmillan, South Yarra, Melbourne. University of Wollongong 2011, EDGT976 Topic 9: Participating in the world through language (The interpersonal function of language): (i) Resources for interaction (Mood), Course notes, accessed 15/06/2011, eLearning@UOW.

University of Wollongong 2011, EDGT976 Topic 10: Participating in the world through language (The interpersonal function of language): (ii) Resources for negotiation (Modality), Course notes, accessed 15/06/2011, eLearning@UOW.