Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T04:24:25.411Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

How children aged seven to twelve organize the opening sequence in a map task

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 July 2015

ANNA FILIPI
ANNA FILIPI*
Affiliation:
Monash University, Australia
*
Address for correspondence: Monash University – Education, Clayton Campus, Clayton, Victoria 3058, Australia. e-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Using the methods of conversation analysis, the opening sequences of a map task in the interactions of sixteen children aged seven to twelve were analyzed. The analytical concerns driving the study were who started, how they started, and how children dealt with differential access to information and the identification of phases within the opening. It was found that all participants oriented to the instruction-giver as the one to start, even when the information-follower commenced the task. With respect to how to start, the older children produced a question and answer sequence or a try-mark to establish a common starting point. Five of the eight younger children inferred a common starting point on the map. Three recurring phases were identified: readiness to begin established through a discourse marker, location of the starting point, and actual instruction. The findings are discussed with reference to the importance of interaction in referential spatial tasks.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Child Language , Volume 43 , Issue 4 , July 2016 , pp. 731 - 759
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

ACARA (2011). CF-10 Australian curriculum: English (content and achievement standards). Online: <www.australiancurriculum.edu.au>..>Google Scholar
Alamillo, A. R., Coletta, J. M. & Guidetti, M. (2013). Gesture and language in narratives and explanations: the effects of age and communicative activity on late multimodal discourse development. Journal of Child Language 40, 511–38.Google Scholar
Anderson, A. (1995). Negotiating coherence in dialogue. In Gernsbacher, M. A. & Givón, T. (eds), Coherence in spontaneous text, 1–40. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Anderson, A., Clark, A. & Mullin, J. (1991). Introducing information in dialogues: forms of introduction chosen by young speakers and the responses elicited from young listeners. Journal of Child Language 18, 663–87.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Anderson, A., Clark, A. & Mullin, J. (1994). Interactive communication between children: learning how to make language work in dialogue. Journal of Child Language 21, 439–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Astington, J. W. & Baird, J. A. (eds) (2005). Why language matters for theory of mind. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Baines, E. & Howe, C. (2010). Discourse topic management skills in 4-, 6-, and 9-year-old interactions: developments with age and the effects of task context. First Language 30, 508–35.Google Scholar
Blades, M. & Medlicott, L. (1992). Developmental differences in the ability to give route directions from a map. Journal of Environmental Psychology 19, 175–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, G., Anderson, A., Shillock, R. & Yule, G. (1984). Teaching talk: strategies for production and assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Carletta, J. & Mellish, C. S. (1996). Risk-taking and recovery in task-oriented dialogue. Journal of Pragmatics 26, 71–107.Google Scholar
Carmiol, A. & Vinden, P. (2013). Enhancing preschoolers’ understanding of ambiguity in communication: a training study on misunderstandings. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly 59, 79–105.Google Scholar
Filipi, A. (1998). Managing roles in the openings and closings of an Italian oral test. Monash University Linguistics Papers 1, 3–10.Google Scholar
Filipi, A. (2007). A toddler's treatment of mm and mm hm in talk with a parent. In Rendle-Short, J. & Neville, M. (eds), Australian Review of Applied Linguistics (Special thematic issue: language as action), 30, 33.1–33.17.Google Scholar
Filipi, A. (2009). Toddler and parent interaction: the organisation of gaze, pointing and vocalisation. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Filipi, A. (2014). Conversation analysis and pragmatic development. In Matthews, D. (ed.), Pragmatic development in first language acquisition, 71–86. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Filipi, A. (2015). The development of recipient design in bilingual child–parent interaction. Research on Language and Social Interaction 48(1), 100–119.Google Scholar
Filipi, A. & Wales, R. J. (2003). Differential uses of okay, right, and alright, and their function in signaling perspective shift or maintenance in a map task. Semiotica 147, 429–55.Google Scholar
Filipi, A. & Wales, R. J. (2004). Perspective-taking and perspective-shifting as socially situated and collaborative actions. Journal of Pragmatics 36, 1851–86.Google Scholar
Filipi, A. & Wales, R. J. (2009). An interactionally situated analysis of what prompts shift in the motion verbs ‘come’ and ‘go’ in a map task. In Coventry, K. R., Tenbrink, T. & Bateman, J. A. (eds), Spatial language and dialogue, 56–69. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Filipi, A. & Wales, R. J. (2010). The organization of assessments produced by children and adults in task based talk. Journal of Pragmatics 42, 3114–29.Google Scholar
Flavell, J. H., Green, F L. & Flavell, E. R. (1985). The road was not taken: understanding the implications of initial uncertainty in evaluating spatial directions. Developmental Psychology 21, 207–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forrester, M. (2008). The emergence of self-repair: a case study of one child during the early pre-school years. Research on Language and Social Interaction 41, 99–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gardner, H. & Forrester, M. A. (eds) (2010). Analysing interactions in childhood: insights from conversation analysis. Oxford: Wiley/Blackwell.Google Scholar
Goodwin, C. (1984). Notes on story structure and the organization of participation. In Atkinson, J. M. & Heritage, J. (eds), Structures of social action: studies in conversation analysis, 225–46. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Goodwin, C. (1995). Seeing in depth. Social Studies of Science 25, 237–74.Google Scholar
Goodwin, C. (2000). Action and embodiment within situated human interaction. Journal of Pragmatics 32(10), 1489–1522.Google Scholar
Goodwin, M. H. (1980). Processes of mutual monitoring implicated in the production of description sequences. Sociological Inquiry 50(3/4), 303–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graf, E. & Davies, C. (2014). Development of referring expressions. In Matthews, D. (ed.), Pragmatic development in first language acquisition, 161–182. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Harris, P. L. (2005). Conversation, pretense, and theory of mind. In Astington, J. W. & Baird, J. A. (eds), Why language matters for theory of mind, 70–83. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Jefferson, G. (1989). Preliminary notes on a possible metric which provides for a ‘standard maximum’ silence of approximately one second in conversation. In Bull, P. & Roger, D. (eds), Conversation: an interdisciplinary approach, 166–96. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Kyratzis, A. & Ervin-Tripp, S. (1999). The development of discourse markers in peer interaction. Journal of Pragmatics 31, 1321–38.Google Scholar
Liszkowski, U., Carpenter, M. & Tomasello, M. (2007). Pointing out new news, old news, and absent referents at 12 months of age. Developmental Science 10, F1–7.Google Scholar
Liszkowski, U., Carpenter, M. & Tomasello, M. (2008). Twelve-month-olds communicate helpfully and appropriately for knowledgeable and ignorant partners. Cognition 108, 732–39.Google Scholar
Lloyd, P. (1991). Strategies used to communicate route directions by telephone: a comparison of the performance of 7-year-olds, 10-year-olds and adults. Journal of Child Language 18, 171–89.Google Scholar
Lloyd, P., Mann, S. & Peers, I. (1998). The growth of speaker and listener skills from five to eleven years. First Language 18, 81–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matthews, D., Lieven, E., Theakston, A. & Tomasello, M. (2006). The effect of perceptual availability and prior discourse on young children's use of referring expressions. Applied Psycholinguistics 27, 403–22.Google Scholar
Matthews, D., Lieven, E. & Tomasello, M. (2007). How toddlers and preschoolers learn to uniquely identify referents for others: a training study. Child Development 78, 1744–59.Google Scholar
Millar, B., Vonwiller, J., Harrington, J. & Dermody, P. (1994). The Australian national database of spoken language. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing 94, Adelaide, 1, 97–100.Google Scholar
Moll, H. & Tomasello, M. (2007). How 14- and 18-month-olds know what others have experienced. Developmental Psychology 43, 309–17.Google Scholar
Morisseau, T., Davies, C. & Matthews, D. (2013). How do 3- and 5-year-olds respond to under- and over-informative utterances? Journal of Pragmatics 59(A), 26–39.Google Scholar
Nilsen, E. S., Graham, S. A., Smith, S. & Chambers, C. G. (2008). Preschoolers’ sensitivity to referential ambiguity: evidence for a dissociation between implicit and explicit behavior. Developmental Science 11, 556–62.Google Scholar
Ogane, Ethel, (1999). The map task: an analysis of L2 listening problems and strategies in collaborative discourse. Temple University Japan Working Papers in Applied Linguistics 14, 165–83.Google Scholar
Piaget, J., Inhelder, B. & Szeminska, A. (1960). The child's conception of geometry. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Pomerantz, A. (1984). Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments. In Atkinson, J. M. & Heritage, J. (eds), Structures of social action: studies in conversation analysis, 152–63. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Poulin-Dubois, D., Sodian, B., Metz, U., Tilden, J. & Schoeppner, B. (2007). Out of sight is not out of mind: developmental changes in infants’ understanding of visual perception during the second year. Journal of Cognition and Development 8, 1–25.Google Scholar
Psathas, G. (1991). The structure of direction-giving in interaction. In Boden, D. & Zimmerman, D. H. (eds), Talk and social structure: studies in ethnomethodology and conversation analysis, 195–2160. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Resches, M. & Pérez Pereira, M. (2007. Referential abilities and theory of mind development in preschool children. Journal of Child Language 34(1), 21–52.Google Scholar
Rindahl, L. & Stadler, M. (2011). Referential communication in bilingual and monolingual children. Undergraduate Research Journal for the Human Sciences 10, online: <http://www.kon.org/urc/v10/rindahl.html>.Google Scholar
Sacks, H. & Schegloff, E. A. (1979). Two preferences in the organization of reference to persons in conversation and their interaction. In Psathas, G. (ed.), Everyday language: studies in ethnomethodology, 15–21. New York: Irvington.Google Scholar
Sauvaire, V. & Vion, M. (1989). Expression of the given–new contrast in referential communication: a study of seven- and nine-year-old children. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology 9, 431–49.Google Scholar
Schegloff, E. A. (1972). Notes on a conversational practise: formulating place. In Sudnow, D. (ed.), Studies in social interaction, 75–119. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Schegloff, E. A. (1980). Preliminaries to preliminaries: ‘Can I ask you a question?’, Sociological Inquiry 50, 104–52.Google Scholar
Schegloff, E. A. (1992). Repair after next turn: the last structurally provided defense of intersubjectivity in conversation. American Journal of Sociology 97(5), 1295–1345.Google Scholar
Schegloff, E. A. (2007). Sequence organization in interaction: a primer in conversation analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Schegloff, E. A. & Sacks, H. (1973). Opening up closings. Semiotica 8, 289–327.Google Scholar
Sonnenschein, S. & Whitehurst, G. J. (1984). Developing referential communication: a hierarchy of skills. Child Development 55, 1936–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stokoe, E. H. (2010). Constructing topicality in university students’ small-group discussion: a conversation analytic approach. Language and Education 14(3), 184–203.Google Scholar
Tomasello, M. (1999). The cultural origins of human cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Ziegler, F., Mitchell, P. & Currie, G. (2005). How does narrative cue children's perspective taking? Developmental Psychology 41, 115–123.Google Scholar