| In the 1970s,Schegloff et al.first put forward the concept of “conversational repair”,which attracted the attention of many linguists.Subsequently,it is widely applied to study different kinds of institutional conversations,including English classroom conversation.In English classroom,teachers are needed to continuously repair their own words to provide students with high-quality comprehensible input.Teachers are also needed to repair students’ words to create opportunities for students to produce accurate comprehensible output.Therefore,teachers’ repair on classroom conversation is quite important.However,the current researches on conversational repair in English classroom in China focus on college or junior middle school,and the research subjects are mostly in-service teachers.There are few studies concerning repair phenomenon of pre-service teachers in high school English classroom.Therefore,this thesis focuses on comparing similarities and differences in repair phenomenon between pre-service teachers and in-service teachers in high school English classroom conversation in the hope of putting forward some valuable teaching implications on classroom conversational repair for both pre-service and in-service teachers,to improve high school English classroom teaching.This study altogether selects 5 in-service teachers from Chongqing X Middle School and 5 pre-service teachers who interned in this school to perform classroom recordings.A total of 20 English reading lessons were collected,including 10 classes from in-service teachers and 10 classes from pre-service teachers.Based on conversational repair,the 20 lessons are transcribed and the repair phenomena found to meet the definition are quantified.This thesis,with comparative research method and conversational analysis method,makes a comparative study of the repair phenomenon between pre-service and in-service teachers in high school English classroom conversation from 3 dimensions: trouble sources,repair types and the corresponding repair types for trouble sources.This thesis is mainly to solve the following questions:1.What are the quantities and types of trouble sources in pre-service teachers’ classes and in-service teachers’ classes? And what’s the difference and similarity in the distribution of trouble sources and its types?2.What are the repair types in pre-service teachers’ classes and in-service teachers’ classes? And what’s the difference and similarity in the distribution of various repair types?3.What are the corresponding repair types for trouble sources in pre-service teachers’ classes and in-service teachers’ classes? And what’s the difference and similarity in the distribution of the corresponding repair types for trouble sources?Research findings are summarized as follows:1.In terms of trouble sources,the frequency of trouble sources for pre-service teachers is higher.As for its type,the frequency of semantic trouble sources for pre-service teachers is higher,while the frequency of linguistic trouble sources is lower than that of in-service teachers.Within form trouble sources,pre-service teachers have a higher proportion of lexical errors,while in-service teachers have a higher proportion of grammatical errors;a significant difference exists in phonological errors.2.In terms of repair types,the frequency of unsuccessful repair for pre-service teachers is higher than that of in-service teachers.As for successful repair,the frequency of successful direct repair is higher in in-service teachers’ classes.As for successful initiated repair,there is a significant difference in TITR,LITR,LILR and T/Lo IT/Lo R.Pre-service teachers’ TITR,LITR and LILR are higher than that of in-service teachers.In-service teachers’ T/Lo IT/Lo R is higher than pre-service teachers.There is a significant difference in SISR and OIOR.Pre-service teachers prefer SISR,while in-service teachers prefer OIOR.As for unsuccessful repair,in-service teachers are higher in zero repair;pre-service teachers are higher in unsuccessful direct repair.3.In terms of repair types for trouble sources,both pre-service teachers and in-service teachers use more direct repair for form errors,but in-service teachers use more direct repair for semantic errors.As for successful initiated repair,for phonological and grammatical errors,OIOR is the most frequently used repair type for both pre-service and in-service teachers.As for semantic and lexical trouble source,SISR is the most frequently used repair type for pre-service and in-service teachers.As for unsuccessful repair,pre-service teachers’ failure mainly exists in zero repair and direct repair for grammatical errors,while in-service teachers’ failure focus on zero repair for phonological errors.Based on research findings above,teaching implications on classroom conversational repair for pre-service teachers and in-service teachers are given respectively: 1)pre-service teachers should decrease the high frequency of unsuccessful repair and teachers’ trouble sources,and choose repair pattern flexibly to improve the quality of teachers’ classroom discourse;2)in-service teachers should use more SISR and OISR rather than OIOR,make a balance between form repair and semantic repair,and cultivate students’ independent learning habit. |
