LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

Linguistic Adjustments in
Teacher Talk
Yana Dodu

G00030521

American University of Sharjah

0
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………………… 4

1.1 Statement of the problem ………………………………………………………….. 4

1.2 Background overview …………………………………………………………….... 5
1.3 Definition of Teacher Talk ……………………………………………………...… 7
1.4 Rational for the thesis …………………………………………………………….. 9
1.5 Significance of the thesis ………………………………………………………….. 11
1.6 Aims and Objectives of the thesis: ……………………………………………….. 13
1.7 Structure of the thesis: ……………………………………………………………. 14

2. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK & THEORETICAL BACKGROUND…………. 15

2.1 Conceptual Framework …………………………………………………………. 15

2.2 Terminology explained …………………………………………………...……… 16
2.3 Communicative Language Teaching (CLT)……………………………………. 19
2.3.1 Understanding of CLT………………………………………………………. 20
2.3.2 Current practices in communicative language teaching ………………......
21
2.3.3 CLT- A paradigm shift ………………………………………………...…… 23
2.3.4 Impact of CLT ……………………………………………………………… 24

3. LITERATURE REVIEW ………………………………………………………….….. 25

3.1 Importance of Teacher Talk: …………………………………………………..…26

3.1.1 Institutional and Non- institutional talk …………………………………....26
3.1.2 Importance of Teacher talk (TT) in Foreign Language Learning………...27
3.1.3 Related theories ……………………………………………………………... 28
3.2 Concept and Nature of Foreign Talk …………………………………………… 33
3.2.1 Types of Adjustment in FT ……………………..………………………….. 34
3.2.2 FT Outside the Classroom………………………..…………………………. 37
3.2.3 FT in the Classroom ……………………………………………………….... 42
3.3 Studies on Teacher Talk ………………………………………………………… 45
3.3.1 Descriptive Studies …………………………………………………………. 46
3.3.2 Correlational Studies ……………………………………………………….. 47

1
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

3.3.3 Experimental studies ………………………………………………………... 48

3.3.4 Qualitative studies ……………………………………………………..…….49
3.4 Features of Teacher Talk ………………………………………………………... 50
3.4.1 Formal features of Teacher Talk ………………………………………….. 51
3.4.2 Functional features of Teacher Talk ……………………………………… 54
3.5 Comprehensible input……………………………………………………………. 55
3.5.1 Linguistic modifications .…………………………………………………… 57
3.5.2 Interactional modification ………………………………………………….. 61
3.6 Linguistic adjustments …………………………………………………………….64
3.6.1 Parameters for linguistic adjustments……………………………………….64
3.6.2 Methodological issues in linguistic adjustments…………………………… 66

4. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ……………………………….…………………….. 70

4.1 Participants or Subjects ………………………………………………………….. 70

4.2 Data collection and method ……………………………………………………... 70
4.3 Data Analysis Tools ………………………………………………………………. 72
4.4 Data Analysis …………………………………………………………………….. 73
4.5 Stages of Methodology …………………………………………………………… 74

5. RESULTS AND ANALYSIS …………….…………………………………………….. 76

5.1 Result and analysis for Question 1 ……………………………………………….76

5.2 Result and analysis for Question 2: ………………………………………………79
5.3 Result and analysis for Question 3: …………………………………………….. 84
5.4 Result and analysis for Question 4 ……………………………………………… 86

6. CONCLUSION ………………………………………………………………………… 89

6.1 Findings and Implications ……………………………………………………… 89

6.2 Limitations and further study ………………………………………………….. 91

2
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

Abstract

This study investigates teacher talk and attempts to formulate a general description of the
linguistic adjustments particular to the classroom speech of ESL teachers. It describes the
various characteristics of ESL teachers' input to second language learners by comparing them
to the results of researchers who have investigated the patterns of teachers’ input. Various
linguistic adjustments, modifications and simplifications, which differentiate Teacher Talk
from the discourse outside of the classroom, have been found in previous studies conducted
in this field. However, present day ESL classrooms require Communicative Language
Teaching (CLT), where the use of authentic language materials in natural spoken and written
system is considered essential. The study discusses the type of teacher talk used by ESL
teachers in the classrooms to ensure comprehensible input, and at the same time expose
students to natural authentic language input. The purpose of this study is to examine
linguistic adjustments in teacher talk in the English language classroom and to explore the
reasons for these modifications. The answers to the research questions were pursued by using
qualitative exploration. The examination focused on observing teacher talk of four English
teachers, and was carried out at the British Council, Dubai. This research was designed to
raise teachers and educators’ awareness, through the analysis of transcriptions, of the type,
frequency, and similarities or differences of linguistic adjustments in EFL context. Findings
are summarised and a few cautious statements concerning the implications for the ESL
classroom are made. It is believed that this study would be beneficial to complement
teachers’ lack of clear-cut awareness of precise gradations of linguistic complexities which
often results in reliance on an intuitive feel for what makes studies conducted in the UAE.
The research might encourage teachers of English to rethink the use of linguistic adjustments
and modifications of their classroom language, and if necessary, enhance their performance
and maximize the quality of the input.

Keywords: Teacher Talk, Classroom talk, the initiation-response-feedback stages, ESL,

linguistic adjustments, modifications.

3
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

Chapter 1

Introduction

“If language is not correct, then what is said is not what is meant; if what is said is not what is
meant, then what must be done remains undone; if this remains undone, morals and art will
deteriorate; if justice goes astray, the people will stand about in helpless confusion. Hence
there must be no arbitrariness in what is said. This matters above everything.”
Confucius

The importance of language and its authenticity has always been considered as the pivot of
the institutional success. In none of the social institutions is communication more important
than in the classroom teaching. The dialogue that takes place between the teacher and the
pupils in the class forms a basis of the educational process and serves as a foundation for the
teaching learning in the society. In spite of the established importance of teacher talk and its
impact on the educational process, there has not been much educational research on the
subject based on the direct observation and recording of the teaching process, as it takes place
in the classroom. The paper is an endeavour in this direction. It observes the actual discourse
in the classroom and examines the variability of the language and the adjustments made in a
given setting (UAE).

1.1 Statement of the problem

It is commonly observed that people tend to simplify their language and adapt it as per the
change in settings and circumstances. The simplification of the language can be examined in
various circumstances while talking to a baby, during communication with impaired people
and foreigners. The reason behind the adjustments in the language is the belief that the
interlocutor might have trouble in understanding the normal pace of speech on account of the
prosodic or grammatical complexities.

The quality of speech thus depends on the communicative context in which the particular
speech is produced. There has been ample evidence that reveals that human beings
unconsciously make adjustments to their speech in order to cater to the different audience.
The reason for these adjustments is the influence of the different social factors on the
variations produced in the language.

4
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

The linguistic variations produced in the language can be seen at different levels like
phonology, morphology, vocabulary, syntax, discourse etc. However, it is to be noted that
such inconsistency in the language results in great variations which might lead to confusion.
These adjustments in the language need to be accounted, especially when the language is
used as a means of instruction in the teaching-learning process. As most language learning
occurs through formal instruction, the notion of “foreigner talk” gave rise to a similar notion
called “teacher talk”.

“Teacher talk” that results from attempts to teach the target language is necessarily different
from the talk that occurs naturally outside the classroom. Specificity of the language of
instruction that second language teachers use to speak to their students in the classroom has
been a strongly debated topic during the last two decades. Research in this field generally
seeks to determine how speech addressed to second language learners in the classroom differs
from other “talks” or other ‘simple codes’ (Ferguson, 1971) of various kinds, such as
foreigner talk, child language, pidgins, early second language and telegraphese (Ferguson,
1971).

A number of researchers have engaged in descriptions of teacher talk characteristics, starting

in the 1960s with Chomsky’s claims about the ways caregivers address children and leading
to the recent Conversation Analysis (CA) studies of Walsh (2002), Brown (2007) Ewert,
(2009). From this work, three major aspects have emerged regarding teacher talk in second
language classes: error treatment, input features, and interactional features.

The current study focuses its attention on the “input features” which include the use of
syntactically less complex sentences, high frequency vocabulary, repetition, rephrasing and
summaries of preceding utterances, and frequent use of yes/no questions rather than wh-
questions (Kataoka, 2001).

1.2 Background overview

The studies on teaching methodology have captured a great deal of attention from the
scholars in the field on the account of its crucial role in teaching. However teacher talk (TT)
did not arouse the attention of the academic field as early as the studies on teaching. The
critical role of teacher talk in classroom teaching has now been recognized and is studied
deeply as the branch of micro-teaching i.e. the classroom research. Classroom research is a
field of research that analyses the process of teaching and learning by studying their

5
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

occurrence in the classroom setting. The major objective of classroom-orientated research is

that it investigates what happens inside the classroom. In doing so it recognizes the
phenomena that encourage or inhibit the learning-teaching process in the class (Allwright &
Bailey, 1991).

As discussed, in the beginning the parameter of the successful teaching was considered to be
the efficiency of the teaching methodology adopted and its implementation in the classroom.
It was assumed that the effect of teaching on the process of learning is completely dependent
on the teaching method used. There have been many research studies conducted on the
subject like the studies by Scherer and Wertheimer in 1964 and Smith in 1970. These studies
sought to find the comparative effectiveness of methods like grammar- translation, audio-
lingualism and cognitive code. However Ellis (1985) pointed out that the investigation of
these studies could not establish why one of the methods was more successful than the other.
In spite of the differences in the methodological principles the different methods resulted in
the similar framework of classroom classification as a result of which the learning outcomes
of the language were more or less same (Ellis, 1985).

The role of teacher talk in successful teaching has come to attain greater importance with the
rejection of the primacy of teaching methodology in influencing the successful process of
learning. It was being hypothesized by the researchers that there must be some other variable
that affects language learning outcomes. It was agreed by many that classroom interaction
acts as an important variable in the second language acquisition. The researchers’ attention
was then directed to studying the processes of the classroom interaction by observing the
classroom discourse and collecting the language data from the classroom itself (Ellis, 1985).

The micro-branch of teaching called “classroom process research” calls for the investigation
of communication in the classroom. This branch of study has come to take different forms
like interaction analysis, teacher talk and discourse analysis. Of all the forms teacher talk has
become the most important field of study in the classroom research because TT involves all
the dimensions of the classroom process from the task of giving the instructions to
questioning or monitoring the students and providing the feedback (Ellis, 1985).

As observed by Chaudron (1988), initially all these types of studies focused on the
description of the characteristics of teacher talk addressed to L2 learners and how it differed
from the talk addressed to L2 learners in non-institutional settings. These research studies

6
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

aimed to find out what makes teacher talk which is referred as TT a helpful tool in the
process of learning (Chaudron, 1988).

This kind of research further led to the mushrooming of the new research avenues in teacher
talk such as the description and quantification of the features of the teacher talk- the rate of
speech, the syntax, the vocabulary and the practical functions that characterized teacher talk.
For example: the pragmatic functions were studied by Chaudron (1988), the quantity or the
amount of teacher talk was studied by Bellack (1996), the rate of speech was studied by
Griffiths (1990), the modifications in syntax were studied by Pica, & Long (1986) and Ellis
(1994) and the modifications in vocabulary were studied by (Henzl, 1979). There were also
studies conducted on the advanced level topics like the investigation of the error treatment by
Fanselow (1977) and Nunan (1989a), the functional distribution by Ellis (1994), the degree of
communicativeness by Thornbury (1996), codes switching by Romaine (1989) and turn
taking by Allwright (1980) and Seliger (1977) (as quoted in Chaudron, 1988).

The most popular features of TT are examined and summarised by Chaudron (1988) whose
contribution comes noteworthy in the context. According to him the teacher talk as a
phenomenon can be characterized by studying IRF framework structure. The other features
that characterize TT are simplification of the speech at the level of grammar and vocabulary,
the exaggerated pronunciation, the slower rate of speech, frequent pauses that are longer in
duration and the frequent self- repetition (Chaudron, 1988).

1.3 Definition of Teacher Talk

Teacher talk is the language used by the second language teachers and researchers to speak to
their non- native speakers while instruction. The concept of teacher talk has been one of the
most hotly debated topics among many second language researchers and teachers for over
two decades. Teacher talk as conceived by different scholars and researchers is the kind of
language used by the teacher for giving instructions in the classroom. As defined by the
Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics, teacher talk is “that
variety of language sometimes used by the researchers when they are in the process of
teaching. In trying to communicate with learners, teachers often simplify their speech, giving
it many of the characteristics of foreigner talk and other simplified styles of speech addressed
to language learners” (Richards, 1992: 471).

7
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

The specific form of language that is used by foreign language teachers is termed as Teacher
Talk (TT). As opined by Allwright and Bailey (1991) the talk used by the teacher is one of
the major ways through which the teacher communicates the information to the learners. It
also serves as a means to control the behaviour of the learner and monitor the organisation in
the class (Allwright and Bailey, 1991, p.5).

Krashen called teacher talk 'the classroom language that accompanies the language of
explanations ... and of classroom management' (Krashen 1985, p. 121). Ellis (1985)
formulated his view about teacher talk –as a result of prolonged study. “Teacher talk is the
special language that teachers use when addressing L2 learners in the classroom. There is
systematic simplification of the formal properties of the teacher’s language… studies of
teacher talk can be divided into those that investigate the type of language that teachers use in
language classrooms and those that investigate in the type of language they use in subject
lessons.” He also commented that “the language that teachers address to L2 learner is treated
as a register, with its own specific formal and linguistics properties” (Ellis, 1985, p. 145).

On the basis of these definitions one can state that that Teacher Talk is considered as a
special language of instruction that differs considerably from the language that is used in the
other setting and the language used outside the classroom. It is also clear from the definitions
that the teacher talk in the ESL classrooms is considered as a special branch of
communication and language which has its own formal features which are not present in the
other languages. The special style of teacher talk is also the result of the difference in
physical setting which creates a difference in the sample of participants thereby leading to the
differences in the objectives of teaching.

Moreover, the above definitions also clearly state that the concept of teacher talk is regarded
as the special communicative activity that is conducted with the objective to communicate
with the students and enhance their efficiency with the foreign language. The teacher talk is
used in the class when the teachers instruct the students while teaching, cultivating their
intellectual abilities and managing the activities in the classroom. The target language is
adopted by the teachers so as to promote the communication channel between the teachers
and the learners while instruction. Learners thus develop their language abilities by listening
and responding to the teacher. Thus teacher talk is the talk adapted by the teacher as a means
of communication with themselves and the learners. It is thus a communication based on
interaction based talk.

8
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

1.4 Rational for the thesis:

The process of language teaching is a complex phenomenon as it involves many factors that
are related to each other. According to Larsen-Freeman, the process of teaching language if
summarised can be grouped under three categories- language learner/learning (How to learn),
language/culture (What to learn) and teacher/teaching (How to teach). The research on the
classroom discourse methodology has thus been a topic that has gained a lot of attention from
the educators, instructors, learners, scholars and researchers.

Since 1960s, the research on the subject of classroom teaching has grown rapidly. When we
consider the domain of language teaching in education the teaching methodology used is not
considered to be highly influential, indeed it is opined that teacher talk plays a more
important role in the classroom discourse process. Thus the focus of the research in this ambit
has shifted from the teaching methods to teacher talk. The speech used by the teachers has
generated several new arenas for the classroom research during the past 40 years. In the
initial years, scholars focused more on the features that distinguished classrooms talk from
the mundane talk which implies to the talk that occurs outside the classroom. However, with
the passage of time the topic of classroom research has opened new avenues of research
studies.

As pointed out by Ellis (1985), the classroom process research which is the term used by the
Gaies to suggest the study of communication in the classroom has taken a different form
altogether. This alternative approach of the classroom process research focuses only on
teacher talk, the language used by the teacher while addressing the second language learners
during the process of instruction. This process involves the analysis of the instruction which
was done by the tabulation of the adjustments made by the teacher in teacher talk (Ellis,
1985).

The study and examination of the instructor’s classroom speech has captured the attention of
the research scholar for various reasons. The first and foremost reason which guides the
different research studies on the topic is the fact that teacher talk plays a very important role
not only in the organisation of the classroom but also in the process of the language
acquisition as teacher talk forms the major source of comprehensible target language input
that the learner is exposed to (Nunan, 1991, p. 189).

9
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

The second reason that guides the many research studies conducted on the topic as well as the
current research is that according to the data obtained from the different EFL classroom
settings, the domination of teacher talk in the classroom speech is evident. In the foreign
language classrooms the amount of teacher talk that occurs generally accounts for one half
and three quarter of the entire talk that is done. The domination of teacher talk in the
classroom is observed in most of the parts of the language lesson. The teachers dominate the
classroom using the “I-R-F” structure which implies “teachers initiate - the students’ respond
- teachers’ feedback” structure. Due to this framework the teachers’ utterances are twice as
much as the utterances spoken by the students (Allwright, & Bailey, 1991).

Teacher talk is extremely important in the process of language teaching (Cook, 2000). Even
the pedagogical theory states the importance of teacher talk. It asserts that the success of the
classroom largely depends on the language used by the teachers during classroom discourse.
Many of the scholars like Cook (2000), Chaudron (1988), etc., have found that teacher talk
makes up for around 70% of the language spoken during the classroom. With the help of the
teacher talk, the teacher transfers the knowledge and skills, organises the activities and help
the students practice. In the ESL classroom teacher talk is not just the object of the course but
also a means to accomplish the teaching objectives and learning outcomes. Thus teacher talk
is important both for the organisation of the classroom as well as the means to achieve the
teaching objective. It is important to further investigate various aspects of teacher talk that are
concerned with the use of linguistics adjustments, and to search for helpful insights into this
practice for several reasons.

One reason is that the identification of specific features in teacher talk would help to clarify
whether second language learners when instructed via language helps them to understand and
process the input correctly or not. The second reason is related to teachers’ lack of clear-cut
awareness of precise gradations of linguistic complexities which often results in reliance on a
general intuitive feel for what makes input simple or complex. The third reason is that with
the widespread use of the Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) approach the use of
authentic language materials in natural spoken and written input contexts is important.
Research shows that teacher talk that results from attempts to teach the target language is
often rather different from the discourse that occurs naturally outside the classroom. The
question is whether teacher talk characterized by utterances that are shorter, syntactically less

10
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

complex and more repetitious than authentic real world language, is a feature of English
language classrooms in an international English language teaching institution.

It is to be noted that most people in UAE learn foreign language in the classroom. Classroom
language teaching is thus the major source of language learning. Moreover, in some cases it
is the only tool of language learning through which foreign language is taught. As we have
already discussed that the role of teacher talk in second language acquisition is very
significant, a research which offers us a better understanding of the use of teacher’s language
shall undoubtedly be of tremendous help to the students’ language learning process. It shall
facilitate the process of classroom discourse enhancing the process of teaching- learning.

The importance of teacher talk in second language acquisition (SLA) is of great importance.
However, teacher talk can be viewed not only from second language acquisition perspective,
it also needs to be explored as an unwritten prerequisite for the teacher as a leader. Providing
accessible information is an important competency requirement for a teacher. In cases where
a teacher cannot communicate effectively and comprehensibly no other leadership skill will
compensate for this lack. Speaking clearly, using language that learners understand partially
predetermines effectiveness of teacher talk from the point of view of leadership. Identifying
the character of linguistic adjustments in teacher talk could indicate essential features
conditioning professionalism and leadership qualities of a second language teacher.

1.5 Significance of the thesis:

According to a study conducted by Osborn et al. (2008) the power of language in oral words
must meet certain standards: clarity, colour, concreteness, correctness, conciseness, and
cultural sensitivity. The domain of public speaking calls for these six C’s of oral language
(Lucas, 2006). It is not without reason that clarity occupies the first place. If words are not
clear, listeners cannot understand the meaning. This may seem obvious, but surprisingly often
it is ignored. One factor that impairs clarity is the use of the technical language that is
specific to a profession. The professional language of a teacher also has certain
characteristics. It is important therefore, to notice the linguistic features of teacher talk and
identify specific peculiarities that may impact its clarity.

It is to be noted that at present there are very few descriptive studies of teacher talk linguistic
adjustments which are conducted in the Middle- East context. Partially, the reason lies in the
reality that more emphasis is given to analysis of classroom discourse or error treatment than

11
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

accurate description of teacher’s linguistic input. Another reason for this is that teacher talk
seems to be regarded as something obvious, not warranting attention and thus, the concept is
frequently neglected by researchers. In accordance with this attitude there is little said about
teacher talk in the numerous textbooks on English language teaching, except for some brief
descriptions of general characteristics of the amount teacher talk and its role and importance
for listeners. For instance, Celce-Marcia “Teaching English as a Foreign Language” (2001)
writing in the “Skills for Teachers” unit does not mention what teacher talk is and how it
should be “crafted” for comprehensibility for learners.

Harmer (2007) “The Practice of English Language Teaching” includes a whole chapter
describing the teacher, and even identifies the teacher as “language model and provider of a
comprehensible input”, but provides no elaboration to clarify the notion of teacher talk. In
other textbooks on teaching ESL (Flood, 2003; Ur, 1996), teacher talk as a
professional/technical language is not included in the content of the book. Some of the
inexperienced teachers often wonder if there is phenomenon like teacher talk. Another
question that boggles the minds of educators is whether teacher talk is different from the
general method of communication. It seems clear that a teacher should understand what
modifications, simplifications, or elaborations might be used in Teacher Talk and the effects
these elements might have on learners.

Throughout the world, English is taught in a wide variety of situations. In many countries it
first appears in the primary curriculum, though many universities continue to find that their
entrants are insufficiently competent in English use. This is despite the fact, as David
Graddol (2006) points out, that good English is an entry requirement for much tertiary
education. In a global market, where English gives the user a “competitive advantage” the
significance of English is clear.

In the United Arab Emirates (UAE), English is a compulsory subject throughout post
elementary schooling and the many students who target post-secondary education in the UAE
typically continue taking English classes. The linguistic environment of English Foreign
Language (EFL) learners in the UAE however has certain deficiencies with respect to the
target language. For instance, due to factors in the socio-educational environment such as
teacher-centered classrooms students are often not encouraged to speak. This can be seen as
the result of the hierarchical relationship between students and teachers in which teachers are
considered as authorities and in possession of the canon of knowledge and students are seen

12
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

as pliant recipients. Thus, despite the amount of English education in the UAE, students often
end up as non-fluent speakers, having been exposed often to grammar translation methods of
instruction. Does simplification or modification of teacher’s input in second language
classroom occur and is it believed to be beneficial for the learners? These are general
questions that this study could address. Other general questions include whether
simplification or modification of the teacher’s input promotes understanding of the material
and promotes a better collaboration between teacher and students.

Second language proficiency of listeners can affect the characteristics of language teacher
“talk”, both in terms of linguistic and conversational adjustments. With reference to linguistic
adjustments, on which this investigation focuses, research has shown that teachers will often
modify their speech by speaking slowly, using pauses, changing pronunciation, modifying
vocabulary, grammar, and discourse (Richards & Lockhard, 1994).

Larsen-Freeman & Long (1991) have classified linguistic adjustments into those related to
phonology, to morpheme and syntax, and to semantics. These adjustments are often regarded
as useful devices for all levels of learners or important parts of the early stages of learning
which should be phased out appropriately as the learner progresses. The benefits of the
current investigation are that it may help promote an understanding of how phonological,
semantic, and syntactic domains are adjusted by English language teachers in the UAE
context.

1.6 Aims and Objectives of the thesis

The paper aims to dwell deeper into the linguistic adjustments made by the teachers of British
Council in Dubai while instruction to the second language learners.
It focuses its attention on the “input features” and investigates how English language teachers
modify their speech when teaching intermediate level ESL learners. For the purpose, four
experienced English Language (EL) teachers are observed, recorded and interviewed. The
research questions that shall guide our study are as follows:
1) What adjustments of phonology, syntax, and semantics do the teachers in the study
use in their classrooms?
2) Can these adjustments be attributed to three stages of lessons observed?
3) Can these adjustments be categorised according to teacher talk language
classifications as described by researchers working in this field?

13
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

4) What reasons can the teachers identify for any linguistic adjustments they make?

1.7 Structure of the thesis:

The thesis consists of five chapters. Besides the current chapter, there are four other chapters
The structure of the thesis is as follows:

Chapter 1: This chapter introduces the concept of teacher talk in the contextual background,
discusses the rationale, the significance and the purpose of the present study.

Chapter 2: This chapter presents the territory of the current research study and investigation.
It also throws light on the different terminologies that are prominent in applied linguistics and
guide the present research. It presents the theoretical background (Communicative Language
Teaching) and the principles of the language learning in the current scenario.

Chapter 3: This chapter presents the review of the different studies conducted on the subject
grounded in the theoretical and conceptual framework that shall guide the present research. It
shall also discuss the role of TT in language teaching and learning along with the different
features of TT.

Chapter 4: This chapter deals with the observation and investigation of the teacher talk when
teaching intermediate level ESL learners. The research questions, methods, instruments, data
collections and analysis are presented.

Chapter 5: This chapter tabulates and discusses the linguistic adjustments made by the four
teachers of British Council in Dubai when teaching intermediate level ESL learners.

Chapter 6: This chapter summarizes the findings obtained from the present research paper. It
also put forward some implications and recommendations for the future research study on
teacher talk.

14
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

Chapter 2

Conceptual Framework & Theoretical Background

2.1 Conceptual Framework

According to the study conducted by Miles and Uberman (1994), conceptual frameworks are
“simply the current version of the researcher’s map of the territory being investigated” (p.20).
It is to be noted that the research functions as the main instrument deployed while conducting
a qualitative study (Glense, 1999). To have an understanding of from where I began my study
is as important as being familiar with the instrument that one uses in the qualitative studies.

In developing my conceptual framework shown below, I placed Teacher Talk (TT) in the
center. Above the teacher talk are placed two components of TT, classroom talk and
foreigner talk. The placement of these variables shows my assumption that they both
represent TT and distinguish it too. Directly above classroom talk, I have placed uniqueness
of language learning (Refer Appendix a). This indicates my belief that the process of
language learning is different from the process of learning any other subjects on the account
of its social and cultural aspects (Dornyei, 2003).

If the classroom allows learners to be in continuous contact with teachers who speak the
target language, and with peer learners who can practice the language together to help in
learning it exclusively comes to be an ideal place for learners to learn English. In order to
make the classroom an ideal place, the kind of input and interaction that is made available by
TT is of great significance.

As Ellis (1985:143) also points out: whether it is a subject lesson or a language lesson, the
success of the learning outcomes largely depends on the type of language used by the teacher
and the type of interactions that happen in the classroom. It can be concluded that TT in the
EFL classroom serves as at least two functions. Firstly, it serves as a valuable input of
language exposure to the learners. Secondly, it is used in different ways to generate the
interaction, to make the input comprehensible and consequently make the learning take place.
That’s the rationale behind the placement of two boxes labeled as Function 1, and Function 2
directly below TT (Refer Appendix a).

15
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

In this regard, under Function 1, I included “authentic” (outside classroom) language which is
gained by learners through the valuable input of language exposure. It’s the teaching of
content or information in the language being learned with little or indirect or explicit effort to
teaching the language itself separately. Under Function 2, formal and functional features are
placed. The formal and functional features of the language are discussed further in detail in
the next chapter “Literature Review”.

2.2 Terminology explained

The applied field of linguistics has certain common terminologies which take on different
definitions or meanings for different researchers. These terms used hence needs to be clearly
defined in the first place.

Second language (L2)

The second language (L2) refers to the language learned after the mother tongue (L1). Thus it
is the language that a person learns or acquires in addition the first or the native language.

Native Speaker (NS)

The native speaker of English refers to someone who has learned and used English from early
childhood. English is used as the first language by a native speaker. They are usually the
speakers who speak English naturally and effortlessly

Non- native Speaker (NNS)

The non- native speaker in applied linguistics refers to someone who has not learned and
used English from early childhood. They are usually the speakers who do not speak naturally
and effortlessly.English is used by such speakers as the second language.

Utterance
Utterance is regarded as the unit of speech in linguistics. In phonetics it is considered a
stretch of language spoken at one instance and followed by a silence or the change of the
speaker. As defined by Chaudron (1988) an “utterance” refers to:

“… a string of speech by one speaker under a single intonation contour and preceded and
followed by another speaker’s speech or a pause of X seconds.”

16
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

Thus utterance can be any sequence of speech consisting of one or more words that are
usually preceded or followed by silence.

Inflection
Inflection refers to the condition when a word is modified or adjusted for grammatical
reasons. Generally an inflection is formed by adding a grammatical affix to the verbal or
lexical root. There are some inflections which are formed not by adding a grammatical affix
to the root but by changing the sound of the root.

Careful articulation
The careful articulation is a condition when a spelling teacher places careful emphasis on
each syllable of a word in order for students to hear the sounds in the word.

Disfluencies
This refers to the interruption the free or smooth flow of speech with a pause or a repetition
of a syllable or word. The disfluencies include repetition of sounds and syllable, blockages of
air flow and prolongation of sounds.

Exaggerated Intonation
It refers to speech directed to the infant in order to emphasise on a particular aspect of the
message. It is commonly observed when adults engage in conversation with young children.
Foe effectiveness the intonation range may be doubled. In English it can range from about
three quarters of an octave to one-and-a-half octave thereby producing higher intonational
peaks with steeper rises and falls. It is this rise and fall that provides the effect of exaggerated
intonation patterns. It is evident from the acoustic investigations of infant-directed speech
which typically displays the use of higher overall pitch, wider and smoother pitch, longer
pauses between the utterances, slower tempo, greater rhythmicity, excursions in intonation
contours, and greater amplitude than what is used in the speech directed to adults.

Release of Stops
Many languages do not require their stops to be released. For example: when Americans
create the sound /p/ in a word their lips remain shut and no air comes out. Most of the
languages require that final stops must be released; however English doesn’t deem it
necessary. Thus in English it is quite feasible to both hold and release the final stop.

Speech Rate

17
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

The rate of speech refers to the number of words spoken per minute. It is to be noted that the
rate of speech used by us determines to a great deal the ratings that can be attributed to our
fluency. For example, a speaker is who has an excellent command and proficiency of the
English language is more likely to speak very quickly and faster than the speaker who is not
proficient and is still learning the language.

The slow rate of speech indicates that the person is careful with the selection of words and
consideration of their pronunciation. The slow rate of speech tend to make the speech sound
laboured, broken up and is difficult to listen to. On the other hand, if the rate speech is too
fast it can act as a barrier to the speaker in terms of understanding. Thus in order to
comprehendible a normal rate of speech is extremely important.

There are many benefits of a normal rate of speech; the pronunciation is easier, the pauses
can easily be inserted and even the stress and intonation are used appropriately. It also
improves the effectiveness of voice and resonance. There are no clear guidelines on the idea
rate of speech as it shows variance with respect to the different geographical locations. The
people in the East speak faster than the people in West and South. However according to the
different studies one can say that the ideal rate of speech is 140 to 160 words spoken per
minute. There are different categories of people on the basis of their speech extra slow, slow,
fast and extra fast.

“X-slow” refers to the person who speaks 80 words per minute. “Slow” refers to the person
who speaks around 120 words per minute. “Medium” refers to the person who speaks around
180-200 words per minute. “Fast” refers to the person who speaks around 300 words per
minute. “X-fast” refers to the person who speaks around 500 words per minute. “Faster” adds
40 words per minute to the current speech rate. “Slower” subtracts 40 words per minute from
the current speech rate.

It has been indicated by the different previous studies that if the rate of speech is faster than
200 words per min (wpm) or 3.8 syllables per second (sps) then it impairs the comprehension
for the learners at lower intermediate levels.

Type-Token Ratio
Type-token ratio refers to the ratio that is obtained by dividing the types i.e. the total number
of different words that happen to occur in a text or utterance by its tokens i.e. the total number
of words. A high TTR shows a high degree of lexical variation while a low TTR shows the
lower degree of lexical variation. The range falls between a theoretical 0 (infinite repetition

18
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

of a single type) and 1 (the complete non-repetition found in a concordance). The TTT has
also been expressed as a percentage by multiplying it with 100. Some of the researchers have
opted for this measure; however it is generally not regarded as necessary as the ratio in itself
is sufficient measure to indicate the lexical variation (Williamson, 2009).

Foreigner Talk
“A register of simplified speech ... used by speakers of a language to outsiders who are felt to
have very limited command of the language or no knowledge of it at all” (Ferguson, 1971).
Ferguson who is regarded as the pioneer in FT study and others investigated the various
adjustments made at the phonological, prosodic, lexical and syntactic levels of language. The
different characteristics of foreign talk are: increased loudness, a slower rate of delivery,
more pauses, more emphatic stress, clearer articulation, exaggerated pronunciation, shorter
utterances, the elevated levels of avoidance of the low frequency items and idiomatic
expressions and lower syntactic complexity.

2.3 Communicative Language Teaching (CLT)

The importance of good communication skills has been acknowledged around the world. This
increasing importance of language communication has led to an increased requirement for
English language teaching. The demand for English at a world- wide level has triggered the
demand for the quality language teaching methodology, resources and materials. The present
study is grounded in the use of one such effective methodology known as communicative
language teaching. Since its origin in the 1970s this methodology has exercised an enormous
influence on the practices and approaches that are followed in language teaching today
(Richards, 2006).

2.3.1 Understanding of CLT:

Most language teachers today, when inquired about the use of methodology in the classroom
teaching report the use of CLT. However, an in-depth understanding of the CLT
methodology is still not known to all. An understanding of CLT can be achieved in the light
of the goals it sets for the purpose of language teaching. The main goal set for language
teaching by CLT is the teaching of communicative competence to the learners.
Communicative competence can be better understood in the light of grammatical competence
which refers to the proficiency exhibited by the person in producing correct sentences in a

19
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

language. This proficiency comes with the knowledge of the topics like parts of speech,
tenses, adjectives, phrases, clauses, sentences, etc. which are the building blocks of the
sentences (Richards, 2006).

Grammatical competence has evidently been the source of attention in many grammatical
books which come with a set of rules and the exercises based on it. The sentences form the
unit of analysis here. Though grammatical competence is very important when it comes to
language learning, it is not the sole dimension of language learning as there can be a case
where a person masters all the rules of the sentence formation in a language but still cannot
communicate the meaningful messages effectively. The art of communicating meaningful
information with proficiency is what falls under communicative competence which is the
goal of CLT (Richards, 2006).

The communicative language teaching methodology focuses on imparting the knowledge on

the different aspects of language. It teaches how to use the language for the different purposes
and functions. It gives knowledge of both formal and informal usage of language. It also
deals with the production and understanding of the different types of texts. It also throws light
on the different communication strategies that can be deployed to maintain a communication
despite the lack of language knowledge (Richards, 2006).

The CLT methodology brought a leap change in the approaches that were followed in
language learning. It gave momentum to the activity based methodology that involves the
development of the different items of grammar through interactive activities like role plays,
group work activities, dialogs and drills and project works rather than the typical traditional
lesson formats that focused on sentence exercises and error correction (Richards, 2006).

The interactive model of teaching as proposed by CLT also brought to light the new roles for
the teachers as well as the learners in the classroom. The methodology focuses on the
participation of both the teachers and the learners. The approach in CLT is more of
cooperative learning rather than individualistic. It was required that the students listen to both
peer and teachers for the model of language (Richards, 2006).

2.3.2 Current Practices in Communicative Language Teaching:

Communicative Language Teaching is grounded in the general principles that take its goal as
competitive competence in the second and foreign language learning. The communicative

20
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

syllabus and methodology serve as a means to achieve this goal. There are diverse practices
that are followed in communicative language teaching as the communicative language
teaching methods is based on a on a number of educational traditions and paradigms. Thus,
CLT in the current scenario reflects the set of generally agreed principles that find their
application in the different situations depending on the multiple factors like, the teaching
context, the age of the learner, sensitivity of the learner, the level of the learner, the
independent goals of the learner etc. Some of the principles that underlie the practices of
communicative language teaching in the current scenario are given below (Richards, 2006).

a. The engagement of the learners in the interaction and meaningful communication

facilitates the process of second language acquisition.
b. The effectiveness of the classroom learning tasks and exercises determines to a great
deal the participation of the learner in the intrapersonal exchange which brings in
proficiency. The learning tasks when effective provides ample opportunities to the
students for the negotiation of meaning, expansion of their language resources and
observation of the language usage.
c. The meaningful communication comes as a consequence of the effective processing
of the content by the learner.
d. Communication as a process is holistic in nature as it involves the usage of different
language skills and models.
e. The activities that are inductive in nature, or deductive, promoting the discovery
learning of the implied rule of language organisation and use as well as those that
involve the analysis of language and reflection facilitate the language learning
process.
f. It is believed that the learners develop the ways to language learning on their own and
are seen progress at the different rates. There is also a variation in the different
learners on the basis of their needs and motivations for the language learning.
g. The classroom is regarded as the community as the learners learn and practice the
language through sharing and collaboration.
h. The gradual process of language learning demands the creative use of language
accompanied with the trial and error. The ultimate goal of language learning is the
usage of the new language accurately and fluently.
i. The teacher in the language classroom acts as a facilitator, one who is responsible to
create a conducive environment of language learning in the classroom and offers

21
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

ample opportunities to the students for using and practising the language with the time
to reflect upon the language use and learning process.
j. The use of effective learning with the communication strategies is what brings about
the successful language learning (Richards, 2006).

The current trends in communicative language teaching are closely associated with the earlier
traditions and traditional approaches. The classroom activities that are proposed to achieve
the goal of communicative competence in the CLT have the following characteristics.
 The students’ communicative competence is sought to be developed by linking the
grammatical development with the ability to communicate. In the communicate
language classroom the grammar is not taught as a subject in itself but is correlated
with other communicative tasks that are carried out in the class by the learners. It
might come in the form of the activity where the students are asked to carry out an
activity followed by the reflection of their linguistic forte in the task done (Richards,
2006).
 The classroom activities in CLT are such that the need for negotiation of meaning,
interaction and communication is created in the classroom. For this activities like
problem solving, information sharing and role play or similar activities are conducted
(Richards, 2006).
 The CLT classroom activities give scope for both inductive and deductive learning
methodology for catching up with the grammatical concepts and the language
construction (Richards, 2006).
 The content provided to the students is such that it relates to their prior knowledge
and life as well. This allows the students to personalize the learning by relating to it
and finding its applications in their life (Richards, 2006).
 Authentic texts are evidently made use of in CLT classroom. This helps in the
generation of interests in the minds of the learner and also exposes them to the natural
model of language (Richards, 2006).

2.3.3 CLT- A paradigm shift:

As we have already discussed, with the growing importance of communication around the
world, the language teaching methodology has gained more attention with CLT approaches,
gaining more significance in the world of language teaching and learning. This shift from the

22
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

traditional to CLT approaches have brought to focus the attention of teachers and learners to
the rich view of language and language learning.

Jacob and Farrel (2003) consider the shift as the paradigm shift in our notions relating to the
teachers, learners, learning, and teaching. The key components of this paradigm shift as
observed by these two research scholars are:

 The focus of classroom teaching is now more on the learner, the role of the learner
rather than the surrounding stimuli that the learners receive. To be more precise, the
shift reflects the drift from the teacher-centred instruction to the learner–centred.
 The process of learning is the focal point rather than the products that are produced by
the learner. So the move can be regarded as the one from product orientation to the
process orientation.
 There is more attention paid on the communal or the social nature of learning. Thus
shifting from the individualistic approach to a collaborative approach as the students
are no longer considered in isolation.
 There is a huge emphasis on the diversity among the learners. The diverse background
of the learners is taken as an important resource and aid to learning rather than the
barriers as it was perceived before.
 In the direction of the research studies, there is more focus on the views of the sample
that is inside the classroom instead of the views that come from the observed who
come from outside for studying the classroom process and drawing the analysis and
generalization about what goes inside the classroom. The shift can be understood on
the account of the new research innovations like qualitative research that recognizes
the subjective and affective domains of the participants inside the classroom. Thus
placing more emphasis on the context and its uniqueness.
 With the shift of emphasis on context, it is associated the shift towards the holistic
learning which involves the establishment of connection between the school and the
outside world.
 With the paradigm shift there is more focus on making the students understand the
purpose of learning rather than accepting the things blindly.
 There is an evident shift from the part–to–whole approach to the whole–to–part
approach. An example of the whole-to-part approach is the use of the whole text in

23
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

the class in order to make the students understand the different features that make for
the organisation of the text or the choice of words, etc.
 There is a shift from rote learning, drill like session to understanding the importance
of meaning (Jacob and Farrel, 2003).

2.3.4 Impact of CLT:

With CLT, learning is seen as a lifetime process instead of a temporary process conducted
with a view to prepare the students for a particular exam. The CLT paradigm shift has
resulted in some major changes in the approaches to language learning. The CLT has given
more autonomy to the learners over the process of learning by increasing their participation in
the selection of activities. The students can also opt for tasks such as self-assessment, etc.
(Jacob and Farrel, 2003).

The CLT deploys the diverse backgrounds of the learner as an aid to learning based on the
premise that different learners have different strengths due to which they acquire and process
the information in different ways. This has led to the development of different learning
strategies for the students as the teachers have stopped to shape all learners in one mould. The
methodology has also led to increased interaction among learners by placing more emphasis
on social nature of learning or cooperative learning (Jacob and Farrel, 2003).

English is no longer dealt as a stand-alone subject in the syllabus. There is a well-marked

curriculum which integrates the different processes of learning in interesting ways. The CLT
also leads to the development of the higher order thinking skills like the creative and critical
thinking ability. The CLT methodology uses new forms of assessment like observation,
interviews, journals, and portfolios to get a wider picture of the students’ learning process
(Jacob and Farrel, 2003).

It is to be noted that as CLT takes into account different approaches according to the
classroom situation and learners’ ability there is no syllabus model which is concisely
recommended in the context. The language syllabus is such that it systematically covers the
different components of communicative competence - language skills, content, grammar,
vocabulary, and functions. By and large, the methodology of CLT is important as the role of
communication in language teaching and learning is accepted by one and all.

24
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

Chapter 3

Literature Review

3.1 Importance of Teacher Talk

There have been many studies conducted over the examination of the social organisation of
talk in different settings. The social organisation of talk has been studied in settings like
courtrooms (Atkinson and Drew, 1979), classroom (McHoul, 1978; Mehan, 1979), medical
consultations (Silverman, 1987), personal and group interviews (Greatbatch, 1988), and
various emergency-related services (Whalen and Zimmerman in 1987 and Zimmerman in
1984) (as quoted in Xuewen, 2003).

3.1.1 Institutional and Non- institutional talk:

As Stephen and Francis (2001) observe, these studies have contributed a great deal to the
understanding of the process of the conduction and transmission of information during the
official activities of one sort or the other via the channels of speech. According to these
studies the ‘institutional’ and ‘non-institutional’ talk are opposite each other. They assume
and contend that these two forms of talk can be distinguished from each other on the account
of their generic properties (Stephen and Francis, 2001).

The concepts and methods of the conversational analysis can be extended beyond the
territory of the ordinary conversation for the analysis of the different forms of the institutional
talk. This principle can be applied to bring to light the fact that the interaction in institutional
talk differs from ordinary talk in an orderly manner. There are certain sequential
organisational characteristics of ordinary conversation which have laid down the foundation
for the other forms of speech exchange systems. Institutional talk as per this foundation
includes more limiting or ‘constrained’ ways of talking than that of the manner of the
‘ordinary conversation’ (Hester & Francis, 2001).

These constrained ways of talking in conversation can be defined by investigating the

language learning environments in different settings - foreign language classrooms, ESL
classrooms, immersion program classroom, bilingual classrooms, mainstream classrooms,
etc., where the students present have limited proficiency in the language. In such classrooms
the learners come from different backgrounds, even the teachers vary in their experience as

25
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

well as subject expertise considerably. This approach helps in the understanding of the factors
that facilitate second language acquisition in the classroom context (Ellis, 1990).

3.1.2 Importance of Teacher talk (TT) in Foreign Language Learning:

Teacher talk (TT) plays an important role in the process of foreign language learning as there
cannot be any form of learning without teaching. TT acts as a tool of delivering and
implementing the teaching plans and meeting the teaching objectives. The relationship
between teacher talk and the process of language learning has been widely studied and
established by different researchers.

Nunan (1991) observes that TT plays a crucial role in the classroom not just as a tool for the
organisation and monitoring of the classroom but also as an inherent process of second
language acquisition. The organisation and the management of the classroom is largely
dependent on teacher talk as it is through language that one succeeds or fails to communicate
the intended messages. The success and failure in the implementation of the lesson plans
depend a great deal on teacher talk. Teacher talk also facilitates the acquisition of language
because the teacher’s input is the major source of target language exposure for most of the
students (Nunan, 1991)

It is a known fact that no learning can take place in the absence of input. The quality and
quantity of teacher’s input thus play an essential role in the success of the language learning
process. Stern (1983) contends that if the second language is learnt as foreign language in a
class that has a non-supportive language environment, then the instructions given by the
teachers are the only source of the comprehensible target language input for the students. The
importance of teacher talk in this case is thus highly important. In countries like UAE and
other non-British or non-American communities, the classrooms are the only places for
language learners to get exposed to the target language input. In these cases the role of TT is
heightened to a great extent (Stern, 1983).

It is to be noted that like the learner, the teacher too brings with her language some of the
characteristics. These characteristics in the language owe to the influence of different factors
that had happened to shape the teacher’s personality like the educational treatment,
environmental features, personality traits, sex, previous education experience, etc. Thus it can
stated that with the language that the teacher brings to TT there comes a language
background, the experience or professional training as a linguist, the theoretical
presuppositions, the more or less formulated language concepts, prior language teaching
26
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

experience and the language learning and teaching. These characteristics of the language
teacher are reflected in the different forms of TT. TT, thus, plays a very crucial role in the
language teaching- learning process (Stern, 1983).

English is a compulsory subject in United Arab Emirates (UAE). Throughout post elementary
schooling as well as post-secondary education in the UAE most of the students typically
continue taking English classes. There is a great deal of emphasis on language learning but
the linguistic environment of English Foreign Language (EFL) learners in the UAE has
certain deficiencies with respect to the target language. The target language is not generally
used outside the classroom. Generally for any student in the UAE, the exposure to the target
language is generally limited to the classroom. Even in the classroom there is not much
interaction from the students’ side. Thus, despite the amount of English education in the
UAE, students often end up as non-fluent speakers, having been exposed mostly to the
traditional or conventional grammar translation methods of instruction.

In the context of the UAE classroom setting, the role of TT is extremely important as the kind
of input and interaction made by the teachers in the classroom is generally the sole source of
target language exposure to the students. If the role of teacher talk fulfils the set
requirements, the classroom can become an ideal place for the language learners to learn
English. It can allow the learners to be in constant contact with the teachers speaking the
target language and the peer learners so as to practice the language together and facilitate the
learning process.

Ellis (1985) points out that teacher talk plays an important role in both the language lessons
teaching as well as subject lessons teaching. The type of interaction that occurs in the
classroom and the kind of language used by the teacher largely determines the success of
teaching-learning outcomes. The teacher talk serves two important functions. Firstly, it serves
as an input for the exposure of the target language, and secondly, it is used for the process of
interaction which facilitates the understanding of the input and helps the learning happen in
class (Ellis, 1985).

3.1.3 Related theories:

Krashen’s Input Hypothesis:

This is one of the major theories that have influenced the studies on SLA. As it is agreed by
most of the scholars, input plays an important role in the process of language learning.

27
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

Learning cannot take place in the absence of input. The production of proficient language by
the learner is dependent on the language used by the teacher. The language used by the
teacher influences the generation of the interaction and the kind of learning that happens in
the classroom. The quantity and quality of input is what plays an important role in the
appropriateness of the input and its effects on the language learners in the classrooms.

According to Krashen (1985) the learner’s access to comprehensible input is what serves as a
means to the process of learning. According to him, the acquisition of language by humans
can happen only in one way which is by understanding of the messages or by receiving the
comprehensible input. The process of learning happens when the unknown items that the
learner is exposed to, are just a little above the level of the learner. The “i+1” structure that is
propagated by him suggests the principle. Here “i” stands for the learner’s current linguistic
competence and “1” suggests the things that the learners are expected to learn (Krashen,
1985).

The Input Theory lists two important aspects. These are as follows:

Corollary 1: Acquisition of language results in speaking; it is caused as a result of

competence that is built through the comprehensible input. The speaking doesn’t lead to
acquisition (Krashen, 1985).

Corollary 2: If there is enough of input that is comprehensible and can be understood it

definitely provides the essential grammar skills. The process of grammar acquisition in such a
case becomes automatic and the language teacher doesn’t need to provide the next structure
in the natural order deliberately. If the student receives a sufficient amount of comprehensible
input the structures are provided in exactly the right quantities and are automatically
reviewed (Krashen, 1985).

When we closely analyse the two corollaries and the notion of the comprehensible input one
realize that the comprehensible input in the right quantity influence the acquisition of
language to a great deal. It is regarded as the basic requirement for any learning to take place.
This foundation of comprehensible input in the right quantity is also the central concern for
language teaching as the teacher talk must be comprehensible in the different forms and must
come in the right quantities. However the comprehensibility of the input and the quantity in
which it should be given still remains a questions before the teachers. In order to address this
Krashen describes two ways to address this question. According to him the linguistic

28
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

resources are not sufficient for the process of immediate decoding. The learner must be
provided with the simplified input via the one way or two way interaction. The former form
of interaction includes listening to the lecture, watching television and reading. The latter
form of interaction includes conversation. This is rather a better way of interaction according
to Krashen who contends that it helps the learner in obtaining the additional contextual
information and the input with optimal adjustments in the situation where the meaning needs
to be negotiated due to difficulties in the communication (Krashen, 1985).

According to Krashen language acquisition is possible with the access of the learner to the
comprehensible input. He opines that in the case where the input is completely
incomprehensible to the learner the learning cannot take place. Teacher talk serve as the
major foundation of the input which when provided to leaners expose them to language skills.
The role of teacher talk in foreign language learning is very crucial and important. Due to the
utmost importance of TT all the teachers must focus on making their input comprehensible
and offer it in the correct quantity (Krashen, 1985).

Swain’s Output Hypothesis:

The input theory propounded by Krashen (1985) has been criticized for its notion. One of the
major objections that have been faced by the theory was that though comprehensible input
does play an important role in the process of learning but it cannot be regarded as the ultimate
goal of learning as the understanding of concepts cannot be regarded as equivalent to the
acquisition of the concepts.

Swain (1985) put forth an argument against this theory as Output Hypothesis. The Output
Hypothesis proposed by her focuses on the role of the learning outcome in second language
acquisition. According to her, input cannot be regarded as a sufficient criterion that
determines SLA. The efficiency of the input is rather dependent on the intake. Thus, it is only
when the input provided to the students becomes the intake that acquisition or learning can be
possible. The language of the leaner can be improved only when the learners directs it in the
direction of the production of output. This output can be produced by saying and writing
things or by using the language they are exposed to in some meaningful way (Swain, 1985).

The output theory proposed by Swain emphasises on three points which are as follows.

Firstly the production of output is essential during the process of negotiating the precise,
appropriate and coherent meaning and this motivates the learner to develop the “pushed

29
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

language use” which implies that the leaner consequently learns the necessary grammatical
resources which are important for second language acquisition (Swain, 1985).

Secondly the output also offers an opportunity to the learner to check the workability and
feasibility of the hypothesis. Thirdly, the focus on output or production rather than
comprehension helps the learner indeed compel the learner to progress from the semantic to
the syntactic processing. In case of input and comprehension, the understanding of the
message is possible without any analysis required on the syntactic level but in the case of
production, the learners are compelled to pay attention to the means of expression as well
(Swain, 1985).

According to Swain, language acquisition can take place only when the learners are forced or
pushed to utilize the target language they are exposed to and develop the levels of the target
language. Then the language output contributes to the acquisition of the language. In addition
to the “pushed language use”, there are two other functions or output in the acquisition of
second language. The first function is to give to the learners the opportunity to try out their
hypothesis about the language or to test their means of expression for its workability. The
second important function that is performed by output in L2 acquisition is that when the
learner uses the language on his own he/ she is compelled to proceed from the sematic
processing to the syntactic processing (Swain, 1985).

The notion of Swain can be regarded as an extended support to the idea that immersion
students are not generally able to achieve the competence similar to native-like productive
competence. The reason for this is the limitation of their comprehensible output and not the
limitation of their comprehensible input. The students are simply not given an access or the
opportunity to use the target language inside the classroom as much of the classroom
discourse comprises of the talk by the teacher. Thus, they are not being ‘pushed’ adequately
in their production of output of the language (Swain, 1985).

Swain’s hypothesis (1985) is supported by other scholarly studies on the subject such as
Naiman (1978), Strong (1983) and Peck (1985). These studies serve as a testimony to the fact
that the more the production, the more is the correct production of the language which helps
in the development of the proficiency in the target language. The hypothesis proposed by
Swain not only focuses on the importance of output but also brings to light the importance of
the feedback given by the teacher. The feedback given by the teacher helps the learners to

30
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

improve their preciseness, correctness and accuracy of the language output, thereby
improving their overall proficiency of the language (Swain, 1985).

On the basis of the above discussion it can be stated that the teachers in the classroom are
deemed to play an important role in the entire process of language acquisition. The teachers
must have the potential to push the students in the direction of the production of the language
by giving them ample opportunities and time for practicing the target language apart from the
adequate input that they are provided in the class.

SLA and Classroom interaction:

SLA has been studied widely by the research scholars. A recurrent theme that rules these
studies is that language learning is a process that involves a great deal of interaction. Over the
few decades many research studies such as (Allwright, 1984; Ellis 1990; Long, 1983; Swain,
1985) have contributed to the notion that for L2 acquisition the classroom interaction that
involves both input and output is extremely important. As we have already discussed the
Input Hypothesis’ claims that the process of language acquisition happens through the mode
of talking, or in other words, interaction with others (as quoted in Johnson, 2002).

According to Ellis and Allwright the entire process of classroom teaching must be regarded
as the interaction. With this premise it is quite clear that the language that is used in the
classroom influence a great the nature of the interaction. This in turn affects the access given
to the learners for the learning. Thus in the study of the language of the classroom learning
the study of the interaction is very crucial.

Another study contributed by Van Lier (1988) indicates that given the facts that the important
elements that are crucial to learning are exposure to input and the meaningful interaction with
the other speakers one must try to figure out the things that are provided by the input and the
interaction that happens in the class. Thus, one needs to study in detail the use of the
language in the classroom so as to know the different ways of interaction that take place in
the classroom and their effects on the process of learning.

It was also brought to light by him that the interaction plays an important role in the process
of language learning which happens while making conversation, talking to others and through
the participation in the other forms of speech events like group discussion, debates extempore
etc. Input varies a great deal from the intake which involves the incorporation into L2
grammar. Input can be comprehended both for the purpose of conversational interaction

31
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

(comprehensible input) and purpose of learning (intake). According to Van Lier the
interaction acts as a mediator between the input and the intake. The interaction plays a central
role in the process of second language acquisition (Van Lier, 1988).

The importance of classroom instruction was also examined by Ellis (1985) who points out
that the instructions given in the classroom be it in the form of interaction or in the form of
linguistic rules can influence the speed and quality of acquisition to a great extent. The kind
of interaction that happens in the classroom depends on the teachers. The type of language
used by the teacher in the classroom and the kind of interactions that happen in the class
determines the success of the outcomes (Ellis, 1985).

The effects of the classroom interaction are further studied by Fillmore who investigated the
influence of the classroom interaction on the rate of SLA. Fillmore drew comparisons
between the progresses of the sixty learners of second language in the different classroom
settings. It was found by her that when considered separately neither the difference in the
composition of the class, i.e. mixture of the English speaking and non- English speaking nor
the difference in the kind of teaching offered, i.e. teacher led or open mode of instruction did
have any considerable effects on the success of the process of language learning. The type of
the classroom organisation which is adopted by the teacher did not have influence on the
availability of the facilitative discourse types. The students were found to learn most
effectively when they were given ample opportunities to interact through conversation. Thus,
one can state that the interaction that occurs between the teacher and the student determines
the success of the lesson and its proceedings (Ellis, 1985).

The IRF model which implies (“teachers’ initiate, the students’ respond, teachers’ feedback”)
structure mainly focus on the process of the classroom interaction. In this model, the process
of interaction is generally stimulated by the teachers’ questions which are directed towards
the students. The questions asked by the teacher help in creating a ripple of interactive
activities in the classroom. It prompts the students to participate in different kinds of
negotiation which in turn enable them to understand the meaning of the input. The process of
negotiation helps in making the input comprehensible and thus promotes the acquisition of
the second language. All these tasks are performed by the teacher through the tool teacher
talk. An in-depth understanding of the different features that characterize teacher talk and
their effects on the classroom interaction is thus regarded as very important (Ellis, 1985).

3.2 Concept and Nature of Foreign Talk

32
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

The term “foreigner talk” was introduced in the literary domain by Ferguson in 1968, though
the phenomenon of foreigner talk has made its presence in the scholarly studies long back.
According To Ferguson, “Foreigner Talk (FT)” is one of the varieties of the simplified form
of speech that was used by the native speakers while talking to the foreigners. If we dwell
deeper into the nature of this “simplified speech”, we derive an understanding that it is a type
of modified speech used in general while addressing non-native speakers (NNS). When one
communicates with non–native speakers, speech tends to be slower, the pronunciations are
clearer and shorter sentences are used with less complex vocabulary. These modifications in
the speech make the conversation simpler and easier in terms of comprehension.

Chaudron (1983) pointed out that there are two ways in which a “simplified speech” can be
produced. The first way is “simplification” and the second way is “elaboration”. In the case
of simplification there is in an attempt to make the sentences short. This can lead to
subsequent complexities on the account of too much of information condensed as a short
sentence. In this case the simplification can result in linguistic simplicity but might burden
the cognitive aspect of understanding. On the contrary in the case of elaboration one might
use a complete sentence instead of the complex word or add information to provide a
contextual background to certain linguistic items. In such a case the elaboration can lead to
linguistic complexities but the units are cognitively simpler for the learners (Chaudron, 1983)

It must be noted that when FT is being talked about as a simplified register of language, it can
be simple on one level but complex on the other. Following the footprints of Chaudron many
scholarly studies examined the effects of “simplification” and “elaboration” on the
comprehension process. A study conducted by Yasukata et al (1994) also throws light on
such effects. In the study conducted, the Japanese learners were asked to read similar
passages written in three different versions: unmodified, simplified and elaborated. The
findings of the study indicated that the students who read the modified versions scored better
in comprehension than the students who had read the unmodified versions. It was also found
that out of the elaborated and simplified version the students who read the elaborated
passages scored even better. It was concluded that the elaborated form of modification assists
the process of reading as it gives the essential semantic details to the language learners, with
the help of which they can infer the information in the texts successfully. The study proposed
that teachers often use elaborative forms of modification in second language classroom (as
quoted in Xuewen, 2003).

33
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

3.2.1 Types of Adjustment in FT:

Ferguson (1975) figured out two major types of adjustments in foreigner talk. The first are
the “linguistic adjustments” and the second, the “conversational adjustments”. The linguistic
adjustments are those modifications that appear on the level of phonology, lexicon,
morphology and syntax of the utterance made by the speaker. Contrary to this, the
“conversational adjustments” are the modifications that are made in terms of interaction and
content of the utterance (Ferguson, 1975).

Linguistic adjustment: Ferguson (1975) pointed out that there are three major adjustments in
FT on the level of Grammar. These features include “omission”, “expansion” and
“replacement”. The table below lists the detailed examples and explanations for the
grammatical features of FT.

Grammatical Features of FT

Omissions To omit definite articles, “to be” verbs, “ing”

or other grammatical items like case, person,
tense, plural or possessive markers, the
coordinating and subordinating conjunctions.
Expansions To add extra subjects like “you” in the
imperative sentences.
Replacements To choose synonyms of simpler origin and
frequency instead of complex items, to add
“no” before the negated item rather than
using the negative construction, to use
accusative form as the subject pronoun

These characteristics which are pointed out by Ferguson are not an end it itself and cannot be
regarded as complete but the features that are pointed out by him are quite easily recognized
and clear. It is due to these reasons that they have been widely accepted by researchers in the
related domain of studies. In 1983, Henzl categorised the linguistic adjustments of FT. He
categorised the linguistic adjustments according to the lexicon, syntax and phonology. In
terms of lexicon adjustments it was found that in the case of speaking to NNSs, the native
speakers tend to adopt a slower rate of delivery, clearer enunciation and more careful

34
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

articulation. There are more stressed words, more pauses, repetitions, hesitations between the
utterances, more full forms and less number of contractions. While observing the syntax and
lexicon it was noticed that the canonical word order is generally preferred, the grammatical
relationships are overtly marked, the usage of high frequency words is evident, lower type
token ratio exists and idiomatic expressions are fewer in occurence (Henzl, 1983).

If we put together the results of Ferguson and Henzl the different linguistic adjustments can
be studied and categorised as given below.

Phonology:
 Enunciations are careful and clearer.
 Rate of delivery is slower
 Words are stressed more
 More number of pauses between the utterances
 Pitch is loud

Lexicon:
 Use of more high frequency words
 Vocabulary is basic
 More use of generic terms than specific terms
 Complex words are paraphrased to make them sound simpler
 More use of foreign vocabularies
 Type-token ratio is low
Syntax:
 Short sentences used
 Preference for canonical word order
 Simplified negation
 Lack of subordinate clause
 No copula, pronoun words or function words
 More use of stereotyped expressions like “yeah”, “well”
 Fewer idiomatic expressions
Morphology
 Lack of inflections
 Infinitive verb forms

35
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

 Full forms used rather than contractions

There have been numerous studies on FT examining the subject in the different context;
however, all these studies point towards the same features of the foreigner talk observed as
put forth in the above table. It is to be noted that the linguistic characteristics of FT are by and
large similar across the various languages but the characteristics of FT differ considerably
across the cross- linguistic domains. The reason behind the variation is the involvement of the
different features for the process of simplification in the different languages. For instance, the
omission of articles is very common with English speakers but not as common with the
Germans as articles carry a more important function. However, the categorization of the
characteristics is similar across different languages.

Conversational Adjustment: The conversational adjustments indicate toward the functional

intent of the utterance. These modifications are also important to consider as the causal link
between the utterances of FT within the communicative context cannot be indicated and
interpreted in the light of the linguistic adjustments. Conversational adjustment is also
considered as a crucial element of the FT register.

It has been commonly observed that the NSs try to reduce the complexities for NNSs in a
number of ways when in conversation. The topics under the discussion are dealt in a simpler
manner, there are a number of pauses in between. The messages are also often repeated when
there is a lack of comprehension by paraphrasing or substitution of the difficult words with
more generic and basic vocabulary. There are more yes - no questions which are easier to
answer than wh- questions. It is also observed that the questions are used more than
statements as it helps to initiate talk with the foreign speakers (Long, 1981).

There are many reasons on account of which the questions are used more than statements.
Some of the reasons are as follows:

1. The features like the interrogative form, subject-auxiliary inversion, wh-morphology,

rising intonation acts as linguistic markers which individually or in combination assist the
native speaker in signalling and non-native speaker in identifying that the turn of speaking is
approaching them.
2. The art of questions helps to deduce answers and encourage participation from the listener.
3. The questions also serve to unload the interlocutor’s burden of conversation.

36
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

4. The questions serve the two important roles, firstly they help to elicit the information and
secondly they take acts as the conversation continuers (Long, 1981).

The conversational adjustments thus include both the modifications at the level of content as
well as at the level of interactional structure of communication. At the level of content, the
conversation with non-native speakers generally has a narrower range of topics with less and
shorter bits of information than the conversation with the native speakers. At the level of
interactional structure foreigner talk is characterized as the one with more abrupt shifts of
topic, more questions interspersed that the declaratives for the purpose of topic-initiation,
more repetition, clarification and confirmation checks (Long, 1981).

3.2.2 FT Outside the Classroom:

The term “Foreigner Talk” (FT) was coined by Ferguson in 1971. It is used to refer to “the
register of simplified speech”- a speech which is used by the speakers of a particular
language to the outsiders who are supposed or perceived to possess a limited knowledge of
the language or are completely devoid of any knowledge of the language. The study
conducted by Ferguson in 1975 proved to be a pioneering study as it stimulated much of the
future research on the topic by emphasizing on the phonological, grammatical and lexical
modifications in the talk. In this study the university students were asked to rewrite 10
English sentences if they were to be addressed to the illiterate or the people who are alien to
the given language. They were asked to comment on the other features of communication as
well. The data, when analysed along with the other literary material threw light on the
characteristic features given below. Some of them are as follows:

 Rate of delivery is slow

 Speech is loud
 Articulation is cleaner and clearer
 Negations are multiple in number
 Un-inverted questions
 The pronunciation is exaggerated
 Pauses more in number
 Emphatic stresses more in number
 Use of pidginized forms and loan words
 Articles, copula and do-support are omitted (Ferguson, 1975).

37
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

There have been researches where the observer began to record the speech in the different
settings that are natural in occurrence like the native speaker involved in a casual
conversation with the other non-native speaker friend, the ESL language teacher in a general
conversation with her students, the service personnel talking to NNSs during the telephone
calls and municipal employees talking with foreign workers. It was found that in all of these
observations there have been certain modifications in NS-NSS conversation style. The
different conditions and settings did bring in variations in these modifications but still, there
were certain common elements that began to emerge in most of the types of conversation.

It was found that the talk used by NS to NNS comprised of shorter utterances, less complex
sentences on the level of syntax, fewer idiomatic expressions, low frequency lexical items
than the talk between NS and NS.

Some research studies also characterized non-grammaticality as one of features of NS-NSS

speech, however the notion of ungrammaticality in foreign talk is surrounded by conflicting
ideas and findings and hence nothing precise can be said about it. Some of the studies report
the pervasive use of the ungrammatical speech whereas the other studies found no
grammatical follies in the construction of the sentences addressed by NS to NNS. For
example: Some scholars did not find any instances of ungrammatical construction in the
speech of the native speaker students when they addressed their non-native speaker
counterparts.

Long (1983) lays out a few conditions which determine the occurrence of ungrammatical
elements in speech. According to him the ungrammaticality in speech occurs in the case
when two or more of these conditions are fulfilled. The conditions that he put forth are: a) the
non-native speaker has very low standard of proficiency in the target language; b) the native
speaker thinks of himself to be of high social status; c) the native speaker has a great deal of
experience with talking to the foreigners, and d) the conversation happens to take place with
spontaneity.

According to Long conditions 1, 2, and 4 are important conditions which when met lead to
the ungrammaticality in speech. Of all these conditions, condition 4 doesn’t find an
application in the classroom setting where the speech is addressed by native speaker teachers
to non-native speaker students. There have also been studies conducted on the comparisons
between FT and baby talk which usually occurs with adults addressing young children. This
is also termed caretaker speech or child directed speech (Snow and Ferguson, 1977).
38
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

Both the types of speech, FT and baby talk show some similarities as both are specialised
registers meant for those learners of language who have limited proficiency level. Apart from
the ungrammaticality of the speech, both the types of speech showed common adjustments
and most of the feature that have been put forth for FT were also found in baby talk. However
there is a functional difference between the two kinds of speech according to some scholars.
It is perceived that baby talk was used more to direct or monitor the learner’s behaviour
whereas foreign talk aimed to assist in the exchange of information.

The earlier studies on FT aimed to focus their attention on the modifications that happen at
the different levels of linguistic analysis, i.e. the syntactic, the prosodic, the phonological and
the lexical. However, a distinction between the linguistic form of the speech acts and the
function performed by these acts did not capture much attention. Long (1981) for the first
time differentiated between the adjustments that occur in the linguistic form of the speech
which forms the input given to non–native speakers and the adjustments that occur in the
functions of such speech acts which characterize the interaction with the non-native speaker.
Thus, there are form modification and interactional modifications.

The form modifications include adjustments that are made at the syntactic, the prosodic, and
the phonological and lexical level of the speech whereas the interactional modifications
include the adjustments that are made at the level of discourse. It is to be noted that both the
input and the interaction modification can take place independently. The input modifications
like the un-inverted wh-questions, deletion of do and lack of inflectional forms of verbs
helped the non- native speakers understand things easily. It is worthwhile to note that when
examining the utterance in interaction one needs to take into consideration the surrounding
utterances of not only one speaker but both the speakers (Long, 1981).

In the further research study, Long (1983) contends that in the process of language
acquisition the environment of comprehensible target language is extremely important.
Before this study, as the earlier studies demonstrate, it was generally assumed that the
adjustments made to speech input like the shorter and less syntactically complex utterances
were the only features that were responsible for the comprehensibility of the input. However,
this notion was refuted by Long (1983). The refutation was made on the basis of the
argument that it is logically impossible for the learners to advance to a level above if the
input is continuously modified as per the level of proficiency exhibited by the learner. The
learners need to be exposed to the forms that are beyond the level of their proficiency but the

39
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

input needs to be made somewhat comprehensible so that the learner can process the skills
and eventually acquire it (Long, 1983).

The modifications thus need to be done at the level of discourse so as to facilitate the
comprehension and acquisition of the forms that are beyond the level of the learner. The
interactional structure of the conversation can be modified through various devices like self-
repetition, other forms of repletion (like utterances, questions etc.), confirmation checks,
comprehension checks and clarification requests (Long, 1983).

The study conducted by Long (1981) compares the speech of NSs with NNSs in conversation
that is generated by six different tasks. It was found that the native speakers usually employed
shorter utterances while addressing the non- native speakers. On the basis of the comparisons
drawn between the NS speech to non-native speakers and NS speech to native speakers it was
found that NS speech contained:
 a greater orientation towards the “here and now”
 the number of questions are greater than the imperatives or statements used
 the number of WH questions exceed than the other types
 more number of clarification requests
 more number of comprehension checks
 more number of confirmation checks
 more number of expansion
 more number of self- repetition
 more number of other repetitions (Long, 1981 a).

All the results by Long’s (1981 a) investigation show that the verbal feedback that is given to
the learner in the process of interaction influences the speaker to make adjustments in the
speech. This feedback encourages the adjustments that can be regarded as more interactional
in their nature. The interactional modification that occurs in the talk of the native speaker is
further proved by Long in another laboratory study. In this study, the data that was examined
and investigated consisted of 36 informal conversations between NS and NNS. Of the native
speakers analysed the twelve were ESL teachers and other types of teachers. The non-native
speakers were Japanese ESL program students studying at the beginner level of college. The
participants in the study were asked to talk for five minutes on any chosen topic (Long, 1981
b).

40
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

The findings of the above study were contrary to the previous findings as the verbs in the
present tense forms were not used more often than the time reference for the non- present
time. The topics were also dealt in a briefer manner; there were more number of yes/no
questions. It was observed that there were more un-inverted questions, fewer WH-questions,
more questions in general, and more or-choice questions in FT than in the conversation
between two native speakers (Long, 1981 b).

The study conducted by Gaies (1977) also made similar observations as the study conducted
by Long. However, the subjects examined by him were familiar with each other, shared a
similar body of knowledge and the non-native speakers here were more proficient with their
language levels. This study corroborates the findings of Long (1981 a, 1981 b) for most of the
discourse features that are the characteristics of the conversation between NS-NNSs. But on
account of the differences in the subjects studied, some variations were found in Gaies’ study
which he attributed to the higher proficiency of the non-native speakers and the shared
knowledge. The difference in the subjects studied led to the variations in the results. In Gaies’
study, the treatment of topics was not as short it was in Long’s study (1983). The non-
interrogatives were replaced by the topic-nominations (Gaies, 1977).

According to Long (1983 b) the conversations between t NS-NNS and NS-NS differed
significantly in many ways. Some of these ways are as follows:
 topic switches are found to be more acceptable
 the left- dislocation of the topic words is more common i.e. it occurs more often
 there are more pairs of questions and answer
 the questions are more decomposed (Long, 1983 b).

Long (1983 a) proposes two main purposes in the deployment of the interactional
adjustments so as to classify the range of the diverse features that are associated with the
topic. The first purpose that he proposes is that it avoids the troubles with the conversation
with devices that he calls as strategies. The second purpose that he proposes is that it repairs
trouble in case of any breakdown of the conversation which he calls as tactics (Long, 1983 b).

Strategies are the consequence of long-term planning done on the part of the native speaker
whereas tactics come as short-term reactions exhibited during the conversation. The strategies
affect the manner of talk in which the topic is discussed and comprise of giving away topic
control through Or questions, brief treatment given to topics and the use of comprehension

41
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

checks. On the other hand, the tactics comprise of the clarification requests and confirmation
checks. Some of the devices can be utilized in order to repair or avoid the trouble with the
conversation. These include elements like pauses, emphatic stress, self –repetition and other
repetition (Long, 1983 b).

3.2.3 FT in the Classroom

It is well- known that the language classroom is a place where interaction between native and
non- native speakers mostly takes place. It is on the account of the same reason that the
language classroom is considered an ideal setting for the conduction of Foreign Talk research
studies.

The earlier studies on classroom research have focused their attention on the adjustments that
are made to the linguistic input by second language teachers. They were compared to the
interaction that usually occurs between two native speakers outside the classrooms. The
findings of these studies corroborated that second language teachers use simpler syntactic
structures, shorter utterances and more frequently occurring lexical items (Henzl, 1973).

Gaies (1977) examined the eight ESL teacher-trainees’ speech to their students in the
classroom and to native speakers outside the classroom and observed their syntactic features.
The research findings suggested that speech of the second language teachers was less
complex on a syntactical level on the six measures. It is to be noted that the adjustments are
closely associated with the proficiency level of the students. This implies that the adjustments
made by the teachers who taught the students at the beginner level were more pronounced,
but as the students advanced to higher levels of learning, the level that can considered close
to the native speakers, the adjustments became less in occurrence (Gaies, 1977).

The research study conducted by Chaudron (1979) also supported the findings of Gaies but
he noted that there were individual variations at the level of the syntactic complexity between
the teachers addressing the same level of students. Chaudron also reported similar trends in
the adjustments made by teachers across the various levels of proficiency; however, he noted
that the teachers simplified less with the low level beginners than the trainees who were
examined by Gaies. The variations in the two findings can be attributed to Chaudron’s higher
experience of teaching (Chaudron, 1988).

The first study that could achieve quantification of the interactional data of the FT occurring
in the classroom was conducted by Long and Sato (1983). This study compared the speech of

42
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

ESL teacher with the conversation that takes place between NS and NNS outside the
classroom. In order to compare the two types of acquisition, the second language teaching in
the classroom and the immersion in the natural setting, the NS-NNS conversations were used
as the baseline data rather than the NS-NS speech. The baseline data of the NS-NNS
conversations served to avoid the confusions relating to the contextual and adopted factors
that have generally been presented in studies like Gaies (1977). The baseline data that guided
the research consisted of 36 informal five minute conversation between college-educated
native speaker and beginner level Japanese NNS students. The 50-minute lessons of the six
teachers who were teaching their beginner level adult students were audio- aped (Long and
Sato, 1983).

It was found in the study conducted by Long and Sato (1983) that the speech of ESL teachers
was considerably different on several parameters from the conversations that took place
between NS–NNS speakers. The display questions that were not existent at all outside the
classroom constituted around half of all of the questions that were asked during the ESL
instruction. The referential questions were found to be twice as much as the referential
questions. Contrary to this, the referential questions predominated outside the classroom. It is
on the basis of these findings that the study concludes that the ESL classroom lack the
communicative use of language and thus have not been completely successful in attaining the
objective of preparing students linguistically for the communication that is required outside
the classroom levels (Long and Sato, 1983).

Long discovered that ESL teachers used a higher number of comprehension checks but less
confirmation checks and clarification requests. Long emphasized that if the flow of
information takes place from the teacher to the student which is generally more observed at
the beginner level, there are more number of comprehension checks. However, in this case
there is less number of confirmation checks or clarification requests as the teachers need to
inquire about what the student said is hardly little in the case (Long and Sato, 1983).

Henzl (1983) observed the variety of language used by the foreigner teacher in the classroom.
He called it as the “Foreign Language Classroom Register”. According to him, this register
possessed the features that reflected variations in linguistic competence between the speakers
and the listeners. It also indicated the typical features of communication in a classroom
setting. Both Long and Henzl named the FT that occurs in the classroom as “Classroom
Foreigner Talk Discourse” (Henzl, 1983).

43
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

There have been many studies conducted on FT in the classroom setting. These studies have
thrown light on the relationships among the linguistic input of foreigner teacher, the
interactional structure between the teacher and the student and the system of SLA. The
studies conducted by researchers like Long (1981), Ferguson (1982), Chaudron (1983), Freed
(1983), and Owen (1996) have examined the effects of FT on the acquisition of syntactic and
morphological construction by the learner (as quoted in Xuewen, 2003).

Long (1981) discovered that the frequency at which the forms occurred in the linguistic input
provided to the NNSs was dependent on the correct supply of the order of appearance of the
forms in obligatory contexts by second language acquirers. The study conducted by Long and
Stato in 1983 drew comparisons between linguistic input of foreigner teacher inside the
classroom and outside the classroom. In this study it was found that the foreigner teachers’
input contained more display questions rather than referential questions. It was also found
that their speech has more imperatives and more present reference (Long, 1981).

The influence of FT on second language acquisition has been widely studied by a number of
scholars and there are contradicting views about it. According to some studies, the impact of
FT modifications on second language acquisition is positive as such modifications facilitate
the perception and comprehension process for the learner making it easier to understand the
input. By making the input simpler and more orderly in the arrangement it prompts second
language acquisition (Ferguson, 1982).

On the other hand, some studies have pointed out the negative impact of FT on the learners’
acquisition. According to these studies the second language teachers face a lot of problems in
the teaching process on the account of conflicting demands. There is a demand for
presentation of ideas and teaching materials in a clear and coherent manner. At the same
time, there is also a demand for explanation which is comprehensible even to learners who do
not possess linguistic proficiency. Thus, while addressing the demands and needs for
linguistic competency, the teacher needs to be extremely careful. There can be instances
where in order to ensure comprehension there is ambiguous oversimplification leading to
sentences that are ungrammatical, confusing, and redundant on the account of over-
elaboration (Chaudron, 1983).

As evident from some of the studies discussed above like Long et al (1983), FT in some cases
becomes the source of the incorrect input to learners which can be detrimental to second
language acquisition. If the teachers are seen to use the input that is overtly simplified in the
44
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

language classroom, it can prove to be a great obstacle in the process of acquisition of the
communication skills that are essential for the real world. The excessive simplification of
input might tamper with the authenticity of the language, and authenticity forms a crucial
element in real life communicative proficiency (Chaudron, 1983).

3.3 Studies on Teacher Talk

The studies on the teacher talk began around the early-mid 1980s. The emergence of these
studies was prompted by various findings like “caretaker speech” studies on first language
development conducted by Snow in 1972 and 1994, “foreigner talk” research conducted by
Ferguson in 1971 and 1975 which was the research in second language acquisition. The
theory proposed by Krashen and Terell in 1983 which talked about instructed second
language acquisition also promoted research studies on teacher talk.

The importance of teacher talk was underscored by them as they suggested it to be caretaker
speech or foreigner talk in second language classroom. All three types of speech - caretaker
speech, foreigner talk and teacher talk possess some similar attributes. Firstly all of them are
the result of the speaker’s desire to convey his message to the listener. Secondly all of these
show common linguistic adjustments and modifications like slow rate of speech, self-
repetition and restatements. Thirdly the level of speech is modified in accordance with the
level of listener’s knowledge of the language. It is also opined that teacher talk is the major
source of comprehensible input in the second language classroom.

3.3.1 Descriptive Studies:

The different discussions on the teacher talk during the 1980s emphasise on the identification
and description of the linguistics characteristics that are witnessed in teacher talk of second
language classrooms. Most of the studies that were conducted on the teacher talk until the late
1980s were descriptive in nature. For example: In the year 1985, Wesche and Ready
conducted a study on classroom discourse in the University of Ottawa. In this study, the
comparisons were drawn between the class lectures that were presented in English and
French to first language speakers and the class lectures presented to second language
speakers. It was observed by them that whether the lectures were given in any of the two
languages, the classes that were composed of first language speakers and the classes that
were composed of the second language speakers varied considerably. The variations were
observed on the following five grounds - i) the rate of speech, (ii) the pauses and their

45
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

duration, c) the frequency of the tensed verbs, d) the number of self-repetition and imperative
statements and e) the amount of non-verbal information used (Wesche and Ready, 1985).

It was noticed that the lectures given to second language speakers had longer durations of
pauses with more frequency, the enunciation was also found to be clearer. There were more
tensed verbs, the auxiliaries and infinitives were few. Significantly more imperatives (such as
“Imagine that…” and “Suppose that…”) were used and there was evidence of self-repetition
(the use of redundant language forms and semantic content). The use of hand gestures with
the contextual support was found to be more frequent (Wesche and Ready, 1985).

The study conducted by Long in 1980 and 1983 examined interactional structures and
patterns that generally happen to exist between teachers using English as the first language
(NS) and second language learners. In this study, comparisons were drawn between
classroom discourse with the non-native speaker students and classroom discourse with the
native speaker students. It was observed that with the non-native speakers’ class the requests
for the clarification by the addressee were more frequent in occurrence. Even the
comprehension and confirmation checks were more frequent. It was thus contended by Long
that classroom discourse with non-native speakers had enhanced comprehension which
resulted in the increased acquisition and proficiency of the target language (Long, 1983).

Chaudron also reviewed a large number of descriptive studies. The study conducted by him
focused on English as a second language. According to this scholar there are a number of
linguistic features that are found in teacher talk addressed to non-native speakers when
compared with the classroom discourse of native speaker students. Apart from the features
that are discussed above, he included many additional features in his study. The features that
are included by him are: “(a) longer pauses, extra volume, extra stress on nouns, and
exaggerated intonation (supra- segmental features), (b) use of high-frequency vocabulary
words, less slang, and fewer idioms (lexical elements), (c) less use of subordinate clauses and
more use of left dislocation of topics (syntactic features), (d) more use of the present-
progressive form (morpheme), and (e) more use of tag questions and corrective feedback to
students' errors (discourse)” (Chaudron, 1983).

Descriptive studies that have been conducted of late have adopted a new technique or
methodology called “conversational analysis” (CA) for the analysis of the teacher talk. The
technique shall be discussed in detail in the latter part of the report.

46
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

3.3.2 Correlational Studies:

With the mushrooming of teacher talk research studies in 1980s and 1990s the subject of
teacher talk as the sub-branch of second acquisition learning has attained more importance.
The research studies on the topic grew not only in terms of quantity but also, quality. We
have already pointed out that in the beginning most of the research studies concentrated on
the detailed description of various linguistic characteristics that are embedded in teacher talk
of second language classroom. However, by the end of 1980s, the studies began to employ
more of the quantitative research methods which are based on the statistical analysis. The
teacher talk studies thus attained a leap in the methodology. Of all these quantitative research
methods, one method that was much is vogue was the correlational studies method
(Matsumoto, 2006).

As the name implies, correlational studies is based on the examination of correlational

relations among the variables. This examination helps the researcher in making predictions. If
a strong correlation exists between the variables then the likelihood of the presence of some
variables can be predicted. It is worthwhile to note that correlational studies are not capable
of establishing a causal or connecting link or the relationship between the variables.
However, the advent of such a form of the study is a clear indication of the evolution of
teacher talk research (Mackey and Gass, 2005).

Another example of a correlational study was the study conducted by Tollefson in the year
1988. He explored the influence of the relationship between the types of questions that are
asked by the teachers and the response patterns exhibited by the students. The study was
conducted in ESL/EFL classes. As per the study, the questions asked by the teachers can be
divided into two types (i) display questions, i.e., the questions that assess the target
knowledge and skills of the students, and (ii) referential questions, i.e., the questions that are
directed to draw some real information from the students not pertaining to the target topic as
such (Tollefson, 1988).

The study indicated that the referential questions serve to trigger the creative stimulus of the
students, thereby bringing in more interaction between the teachers and the students. Contrary
to this, the display questions tended to stimulate the imitative responses from the students
which do not usually lead to more interactions between the students and teachers. According
to Tollefson, the inclusion of referential questions is important in teacher talk as it promotes

47
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

interactive learning in the classroom, making the session more interactive as well as
interesting (Tollefson, 1988).

3.3.3 Experimental studies:

Correlational studies help in the prediction of the presence of one variable by studying
another variable. We have already discussed the limitation of correlational studies in
establishing the causal relationship between the two variables so as to indicate the presence of
one variable by the other. An experimental study is at a comparative advantage over this as it
has the capability to establish the connecting link or the causal relationship among the various
variables. Until the 1980s these sorts of studies were not much in fashion but gradually more
experimental studies in teacher talk studies emerged in the late 1980s. Such studies made
their appearance in in various second language acquisition journals and publications. In the
1990s they became more popular and very soon they became a widely adopted research
methodology for the analysis of teacher talk studies.

A study conducted by Griffiths in 1990 examined the effects of the different speech rates in
the teacher talk on the listening comprehension of students. The study examined fifteen
elementary school teachers who were to present the three different passages at different rates
of delivery. The comprehension of the students ability in the cases was observed by
conducted a comprehension test. It was found that if the speech rate is moderately fast,
around 200 wpm the comprehension of the students was slower than the average speech rate
150 wpm and slow speech rate 100 wpm. It was also found that the comprehension did not
vary to a great degree between the lessons read at slow speech rate and average speech rate.
The concept of “critical speech rate” was propounded by the study which indicated the level
of speech rate above which the comprehension begins to decline significantly (Griffiths,
1990).

Another study conducted by Sueyoshi and Hardison in 2005 examined the impact of the
usage of gestures and facial clues on the listening comprehension. Some of the other
experimental studies that are noteworthy in the context are Derwing (1995) and Matsumoto
(1998). According to Derwing (1996) there were three types of elaborations that are used in
the teacher talk. The first one is marked paraphrasing, the second one is unmarked
paraphrasing and the third one is unnecessary details. All these elaborations were proved to
have significant effects on the listening comprehension of the non-native speakers. It was
supported by the research that the unnecessary details do not necessarily obstruct the listening
48
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

comprehension of the non-native speaker students, indeed this facilitated the establishment of
the causal link between this negative adjustment by the teacher and the listening
comprehension among the ESL students (as quoted in Matsumoto, 2010).

Matsumoto conducted an experimental study on the investigation of teacher talk in the

Japanese second language classroom settings. The study examined the impact of the global
linguistic adjustment, the series of the contextual pictures and the usage of students’ first
language (English) for explaining new Grammar rules on the listening comprehension of the
students studying Japanese. It was indicated by the research that the global linguistic
adjustments and L1 usage for explaining the rules of grammar had positive impact on the
listening comprehension of the students (as quoted in Matsumoto, 2010).

3.3.4 Qualitative studies:

Over the years the teacher talk studies has undergone many innovations and evolutions. In the
early 2000s the teacher talk studies entered a new zone of thought. The studies on the subject
began to explore the affective domain of the native and non- native speakers during the
classroom discourse. The affective factors like the perceptions, feelings and attitudes which
are experienced by the students when they are addressed using different types of teacher talk
are examined by these types of studies. These affective factors are considered as the section
of “learners’ variables” or the “individual learner factors” or the causes for the differences in
individuals (Matsumoto, 2006).

The affective domain is wide and includes many other features apart from the perceptions,
feelings and attitudes. These factors are the (i) encouragement and confidence, (ii) traits of
personality (like sensitive to rejection, patience of ambiguity, introvert/extrovert, self- esteem
and empathy/ compassion), (iii) style of learning (on field dependence/ independence,
kinaesthetic, visual/auditory),(iv) aptitude and skills, (v) age and (vi) the experience with
language learning in the past (Matsumoto, 2006).

The perception, attitudes and feelings of students are also considered as learners variable as
they do impact the process of language- learning in a considerable way. These affective
factors are studied widely not only quantitatively i.e. by using the experimental and
correlative research methods but also quantitatively i.e. by using the observational technique,
conducting interviews and surveys. The number of qualitative studies conducted on the
subject is much lower (Matsumoto, 2006).

49
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

The findings of the research conducted by Mackey et al. (2006) showed that the students
exhibit accuracy in their perceptions about the phonological, lexical and semantic levels of
error correction feedback. Another similar study conducted by Carpenter et al. (2000)
indicated that the morpho- syntactic recasts were less accurately identified by the students
than the phonological and lexical recasts. It was also found that the difference between the
problematic utterance that was made by the students and the recast of the teacher’s corrective
feedback helped in the student’s interpretation of the recast in teacher talk. It was suggested
that in the absence of such difference the recast might be perceived as a semantic repetition of
the student’s utterance by the teacher without observing it as the corrective feedback (as
quoted in Matsumoto, 2010).

Other scholars like Kawaguchi (2007) and Kozaki (2008) too conducted the qualitative
studies where they examined the perceptions and attitudes of the students towards the use of
various rates of speech and non – verbal or visual information by the Japanese Second
Language teachers. The findings of both the research indicated that many of the students do
not exhibit negative perceptions about the fast speech rates. It was also found that in the case
of fast speech rates, the students begins to work on their learning strategies like asking
questions to the teacher or paying more heed towards the non – verbal aspects like gestures,
expressions of face, pictures etc. (as quoted in Matsumoto, 2010).

3.4 Features of Teacher Talk

TT has many kinds of features which are deeply studied by the education scholars and
researchers. According to some scholars teacher talk acts as a simplified code with two main
features. These features are categorised as formal features and functional features. The first
feature refers to the form of the teacher talk which includes the rate, speed, pause, repetition
and the related modifications of the teacher talk. The second category refers to the language
used by the teacher for the organisation and management of the classroom; it includes the
quantity and quality of the teacher talk; the questions that are used by the teachers, the
interactional modifications and adjustments and the teachers’ feedback (Xuewen, 2003).

3.4.1 Formal features of Teacher Talk:

The classroom- centred research gives a considerable focus on “teacher talk” which examines
the verbal behaviour of teachers in the classroom. This includes the investigation of the
different aspects of the linguistic input which is given by the teacher during the classroom

50
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

discourse. The different aspects of the linguistic input include the different features of the
teacher talk- phonological, lexical, syntactical, discourse features of teacher talk, the amount
of teacher talk etc. and the relationship between the interaction of students and teacher talk.

The different phenomena related to the teacher talk are studied by scholars like Gaies (1977,
1979), Henzl (1979), Long (1983b), Long & Sato (1983). They have drawn comparisons
between the languages that teachers use in and out of language classrooms. Their main
findings can be summarised as follows:
1) Adjustments occur at all language levels in and out of the class.
2) Adjustments are made in pronunciation, in lexis, and in grammar.
3) Ungrammatical speech modifications do not occur in teacher language in class
(because teacher talk should be the model for students to imitate).
4) Interactional adjustments occur. Activities in class are for learning, so language in
these activities often lacks real communicative information (Ellis, 1985, p.145).

It was observed by Long and Freeman that there are other ways in which the teacher talk can
be simplified. They observed that the teacher talk can be categorised on the basis of
phonological, syntactical and semantic aspects. In the syntactic category the length of
utterance when dealing with children was found to be shorter. In the area of phonology it was
observed that while dealing with children the intonation is more exaggerated, the pitch range
used is wide and high. The articulation is clear, the speech rate is slower and there are more
pauses between the utterances. In the domain of semantics they found that the vocabulary is
more restricted and basic and the teachers are very careful while selection of the words used
by them so as to match with the level and proficiency of the students. Moreover, the difficult
and the new words are avoided (Larsen-Freeman &Long 1991).

Chaudron (1988, 85) opines that teachers talk a great deal. After investigating the teacher talk
for a long time they summarised some research results on teacher talk. According to
Chaudron teacher talk in language classrooms tends to show the following modifications:
1) The rate of speech seems to be slow.
2) Pauses, which can be taken as the evidence of the speaker planning more carefully,
are frequent and long.
3) Pronunciation is found to be close to exaggeration. It also appears simplified.
4) The vocabulary use is generally found to be basic.
5) Degree of subordination is low.

51
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

6) The declaratives and statements are used more often rather than questions.
7) Self repetition is commonly seen as teachers self-repeat frequently.

In China, scholars (Hu Xuewen, 2003, Zhu Hong-qiang, 2004) have observed teachers’
behaviour in college English classrooms and have reached the following conclusions which
are similar to Chaudron’s ideas. According to them:
1) The speed of teacher talk speed is obviously slower than the rate of natural talk.
2) Frequent and long pauses occur between utterances.
3) Pronunciation tends to be clear, exaggerated, high pitched and employs a wide pitch range.
Frequent stress is used and speech rhythm is obvious and clear. Contracted forms are not
frequently used. For example, teachers use ‘he will’ instead of ‘he’ll’.
4) Basic high frequency words are often used.
5) Unmarked words and structures are used, there is little subordination. Frequent statements
and imperatives are used. General questions are used rather than special questions.
6) There is evidence of self-repetition (Xuewen, 2003).

The study conducted by Larsen-Freeman and Long in 1991 is a highly significant and
influential study on linguistic adjustments to NNSs. Most of the findings that are stated by
Larsen-Freeman and Long throw light on the aspects that can also be found in the other
studies that are conducted by researchers like Henzl (1979), Terrell (1980), Kelch (1985),
Ferguson (1971), and Xuewen (2003).

The following table is a summary of all linguistic adjustments found in Henzl (1979), Terrell
(1980), Kelch (1985), Ferguson (1971), Long (1991), and Xuewen (2003). The features are
shown in the table below.
Phonology 1. Rate of delivery is slower
2. More use of stress and pauses
3. Articulate deliberate and more careful
4. Extra stress on nouns
5. Wider pitch range/exaggerated intonation
6. More use of full forms/avoidance of contractions
7. Release final stops

Morphology and 1. Utterances are more well-formed / the disfluencies are fewer
syntax

52
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

2. Shorter utterances with fewer words per utterance

3. Less complex utterance with the fewer adjectival, adverbial
and noun clauses, fewer relative clauses and appositives
4. Use of canonical word order
5. More retention of optional constituents
6. More overt marking of grammatical relations
7. More verbal marked for present/fewer for non-present
temporal reference
8. More questions
9. More yes-no and intonation questions/fewer wh-questions
10. New information at the end of the sentence
11. Repetition or restatement ( the NS repeats or reformulates the
NNS’s utterances)
Semantics 1. More overt marking of semantic relations
2. Higher average lexical frequency of nouns and verbs
3. Higher proportion of linking verbs to total verbs
4. Lower type-token ratio
5. Fewer idiomatic expressions
6. Greater preference for full noun phrase over pronouns
7. Marked use of lexical items
8. Use of concrete verbs over dummy verbs, like do

Source: (Nunan, 1991)

All the above findings demonstrate the different formal features of teacher talk. It is evident
that the adjustments in forms occur at all the levels- both inside as well outside the classroom.
The teachers are found to be choosing different forms to meet the needs of teaching in the
class. However, the ungrammatical modifications in the speech should not occur in the
teacher’s language in the class as the teacher talk is taken as the model by the students which
they imitate very closely (Nunan, 1991).

3.4.2 Functional features of Teacher Talk:

The functional features of teacher talk includes the amount of teacher talk, the questions used
by teachers and the feedback given to the students. There have been many studies conducted

53
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

on the influence of the amount of teacher talk on the successful acquisition of language. Most
of the researchers have agreed that teacher talk comprises 70 % of the classroom talk. Some
of the researchers believe that the domination of teacher talk in the classroom is likely to
inhibit the students’ participation in the learning whereas the others opine that the increased
amount of teacher is beneficial. According to the findings of some researchers, the successful
classes were those which were teacher dominated whereas the other researchers believe that
the classroom where student talk time (STT) is maximized was more successful (Nunan,
1991).Another functional feature of teacher talk is the art of questioning- the most important
technique used by the teacher during teacher talk. The questions posed by the teachers during
the classroom discourse have attracted a great deal of attention from the scholars. The wide
spread use of questions by the teachers can be understood in the light of the functions
performed by them. The questions posed by the teachers serve as a principal way in which
the teachers control the classroom. They also serves as diagnostic tool of assessment as it
helps the teacher to get a glimpse of the students’ learning on the subject under consideration.

The questions also serve as an instructional tool. It helps the student learn the new material
and integrate the learning with the old one. The questions thus serve to review the old
concepts and integrate them with the new concepts to be learned. The questioning technique
also serves a motivational purpose. It helps the students engage in the lesson-learning by
posing a challenge and a problem which demands their consideration. It captures the
students’ attention on the topic and steer the lesson learning with the sharp focus. The
questions also encourage active participation from the students and bring about active
students’ involvement. There are different types of questions “What” questions, “How” and
“Why” questions and the open ended questions which do not require inference.

Long and Sato (1983) have made a further distinction in the questions asked by the teachers.
According to them the questions can be categorised as the “display” questions and
“referential” questions. Display questions according to them are those questions which the
teachers know the answer of like “what comes after alphabet B?” On the other hand the
referential questions are those that the teachers do not the answers of like “why don’t you
work hard?” The research studies indicate that the teachers use more of display questions
rather than referential questions (as quoted in Ellis, 1994).

Feedback is another important aspect of teaching. Providing appropriate feedback to the

students also constitute a vital part of teacher talk. As Cook (2000) defines feedback is the

54
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

evaluation of the student’s response. Feedback can be both positive as well as negative. The
feedback given by the teacher plays an important role in the individual’s motivation which
facilitates better language learning. Most of the scholars opine that the favourable feedback
given by the teachers about the performance has a positive effect on student’s performance.
The feedback process involves the assessment and correction by the teachers (Wheldall and
Merrett, 1984).

3.5 Comprehensible input

“… the defining characteristics of a good teacher is someone who can make the input
comprehensible to a non-native speaker…” (Krashen 1982: p.64).

The second language acquisition (SLA) plays a lot of emphasis on the role of input
comprehension it. The input comprehension has been given a great deal of importance in the
past two-three decades. The importance given to the input comprehension is triggered by the
fact that the exposure of the learner to the target language is not sufficient in itself for
bringing about the second language (L2) acquisition. The conviction that the input must be
comprehended by the learner for the process of acquisition has been believed in continuum
from the Corder’s early claims of input and intake in 1967 to Krashen’s Input Hypothesis in
1982 and Long’s Interaction Hypothesis (1983, 1996).

Many of the studies (Hatch, 1983a; Krashen, 1980, 1982; Long, 1983, 1985; Pica, Young &
Doughty, 1987) have asserted that the input which is comprehended by the learner forms the
primary data for second language acquisition. The importance of the input comprehension in
the L2 acquisition process is thus deemed by one and all. There have been studies conducted
on the potential sources of input comprehension and its role in the process of language –
learning. These studies have examined the effects on input comprehension offered to learners
and how it get them involved in the interaction assisting in the second language acquisition.

The origin of all these studies is the Input Hypothesis developed by Krashen in 1980, 1982
and 1985 and which firmly established the importance of comprehensible input in the process
of second language acquisition. According to the input hypothesis if a learner has to proceed
with the process of second language acquisition, the learner must get an exposure to the target
language data which they can access which is what can be termed as comprehensible input
(Krashen 1985).

55
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

According to Krashen (1981) the comprehensible input is the only variable that can be
regarded as the causative variable in SLA. He contends that if L2 acquisition is to take place
then the learners must be exposed to the comprehensible input which contains the language
structures that do not fall in the range of their current stage of inter-language (IL)
development which he termed i+1. The transformation of the learning process from stage i to
i +1 can be achieved only when the acquirer understand the input that contains i+1, by
understand Krashen meant to indicate the focus on the meaning and not the form of the
utterance. The major assumptions of the input hypothesis can be summed up as: a) for
successful language acquisition, the access to the comprehensible input is important; this
stands true for both first and second language acquisition; b) the greater the amount of the
comprehensible input, the faster and the better becomes the process of second language
acquisition; c) no acquisition or lack of acquisition of language is there in the absence of the
access to the comprehensible input (Long, 1982).

The input hypothesis propounded by Krashen (1982) exerted a great influence on second
language acquisition studies. However, it did receive a lot of criticisms from some of the
researchers like Gass (1988), Gregg (1984), McLaughlin (1987); Swain (1985), White
(1987). White opines an otherwise notion that it is the incomprehensible input which plays an
important role in the SLA. According to her when there is incomprehensibility or some sort
of comprehension difficulties in the input offered to the learners it gives a negative feedback
to the learner which indeed assists in second language acquisition. According to Gass (1988,
1997) comprehended input should be given more importance than comprehensible input.
Swain (1985) puts forth her claim in Comprehensible Output Hypothesis and opines that L2
acquisition demands not only comprehensible input but also comprehensible output. Swain’s
hypothesis is contradictory to what is proposed by Krashen where the output or the
production’s importance is very less.

It is worthwhile to note that in spite of the criticisms from a lot of researchers Krashen’
hypothesis on comprehensibility has come to be accepted widely and promoted a lot of
research on the role of input and interaction. Krashen’s theory has come to be known as the
most influential theory as it has shown its impact in the history of L2 literature giving rise to
many empirical studies on the role of input and interaction. It is historically proved that the
comprehensibility of the input is an essential though not the only condition for the language
acquisition (Long, 1983).

56
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

How input is made comprehensible?

How to make the teachers’ input comprehensible to the non- native speakers is the question
that has guided the research of many scholars and theorists. Long (1983) probes and
elaborates on the same question and discusses the two important ways for making the input
comprehensible. He observed that one was through the linguistic modification and the other
was through the interactional modifications (Long, 1983).

3.5.1 Linguistic modifications:

The linguistic modifications suggests that the input is modified and adjusted in accordance
with the level of the recipient such as shorter utterances, modified vocabulary, self-
repetitions. These features that are the characteristic features of the foreign talk are also the
characteristic features of teacher talk, however Ellis (1994) observes the concept of teacher
talk is more specific in the context that it reflects the special characteristics of the classroom
setting which implies that there is a need to maintain an appropriate and orderly form of
communication (Long, 1983).

As we have already discussed that for understanding of how input is made comprehensible
the researchers have examined the comprehension of input in different kinds of environment.
The linguistic modifications in the input can be the form of repetition, paraphrasing of the
words or sentences, reduction of the sentences in length and complexity etc. The different
studied that examined the comprehensibility of input under this cadre focused on the
description of the adjustments that are made by the different speakers while addressing to the
child or a L2 learner. As many of the studies indicate the examples for such modified speech
are motherese (Snow & Ferguson, 1977), foreigner talk (Ferguson, 1975; Long, 1980) and
teacher talk (Ellis, 1985; and Long and Sato, 1983). All these studies contend that such
adjustments in the input assist in the process of comprehension. In the purview of SLA
research studies, it is generally assumed that the simplified input implies to the L2 input that
comes with the adjustments made by a native speaker in order to assist comprehension for
NNS.

The Ferguson’s (1971) account of the simplified register gave rise to the growth in FT
studies. In the beginning of the FT studies most of the FT studies focused on the
determination of the nature of the foreigner talk. Some of the main characteristics of FT can
be summed up as follows:

57
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

a) The linguistic adjustments made in the speech of NS while talking to the non- native
speaker are not ungrammatical but the sentences are well- formed (Arthur et al., 1980).
b) The native speakers are generally found to be using shorter and less complex sentences
devoid of the syntactical and prepositional complexities (Arthur et al., 1980).
c) The vocabulary used is more basic and restricted.
d) Idiomatic expressions and low frequency lexical items are generally not used.
e) The rate of speech is slower, the pitch is loud, the pauses are longer in duration, the
repetitions are more frequent, the articulate more careful (Kelch, 1985).
Some of the researchers believe that even the gestures in FT are more common as it serves as
an aid to comprehension.
The notion of FT characterized by all the above traits is intuitively appealing to all the
theorists and research scholars; however there is still not much known about the individuals
influence on each of these characteristics on the assistance or hindrance of the comprehension
in L2 learning process.

A study conducted by Parker and Chaudron (1987) focuses on the impact of simplification an
elaboration in L2 learning. This empirical study suggests that linguistic modification in the
form of simplified vocabulary and syntax did not have a positive influence on the
comprehension to a great degree; however the elaborative modification like the repetition of
information and a clear segmentation of the thematic structure of the communication had
positive impact on the process of comprehension. On the basis of these results it was
concluded the adjustments in the input must come in the form of elaboration and
segmentation simplification and not in form of syntactic simplification. It is also opined that
the elaborative simplifications come with an added benefit as they offer the learners an access
to those linguistic items which needs to be acquired (Larsen- Freeman & Long, 1991).

Some of the empirical studies conducted on the theme suggest that the simplification aids to
the removal of redundant features that are present in the language. Thus the comprehension
process can be facilitated in a better way through the process of linguistic elaboration rather
than the linguistic simplification. A study conducted by Blau in 1982 found that the
modifications that makes the input more explicit, even redundant retaining the complexity of
the syntax was helpful in the process of comprehension. Even the great scholar Chaudron
(1983) also puts forth his verdict in the favour of redundancy in the process of
comprehension. He explored the effects of the reinstatement or repetition on the process of

58
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

identification and recapitulation and found that the repetition of the simple nouns tends to
play a positive role in the comprehension and influence the intake of immediate language
significantly (Larsen- Freeman & Long, 1991).

The relative effects of the simplified and the elaborated texts on the process of
comprehension are also studied by the different scholars. Yano et.al (1994) in his study
exposed the learners with the three different versions of the passage: the unmodified version,
the simplified version and the elaborated version. It was concluded by the results of the
comprehension tests that the students who got the modified version of the passage performed
better than those who got the unmodified passage. Out of the modified passages it was found
that there was much significant difference in the levels of comprehension (as quoted in
Xuewen, 2003).

The comparative effects of simplified and elaborated texts on the comprehension have also
been studied by Oh (2001). It is suggested by her that the input modifications that come in the
form of elaboration prove to be more influential for the improvement of comprehension. The
reason behind this is that when modifications are made in the line of elaboration the input
retains more native like characteristics. She contends that elaboration proves to be at least
equally successful if not more successful than the simplified modifications (Oh. 2001).

The argument put forth by Young and Doughty (1987) echoes the similar notion when they
draw the comparisons between the pre- modified input and the input modifications that are
produced during the interactions that are negotiated. According to them the an input that is
devoid of the complexity was not found to be a crucial element in the process of
comprehension indeed the interaction led to the input that was more complex but which
happened to be more effective and led to better comprehension (as quoted in Xuewen, 2003).

It is worthwhile to note that not all the kinds of elaboration seem to have a positive influence
on the process of comprehension. The study conducted by Chaudron (1983 b) showed that
the elaboration made by the teacher in terms of the vocabulary might be detrimental to the
learning process as it may lead to the confusion on the part of the learner in the process of
differentiating between the alternative and the additional information in the context
(Chaudron, 1983 b).

The study conducted by Ellis (1995) also examines the oral input and its impact on the
acquisition of the meaning the word. It was concluded by his findings that the elaborations

59
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

might prove to be helpful but the over- elaborations tend to have a negative impact on the
comprehension and might prove to counter- productive (Ellis, 1995).

The study conducted by Chaudron and Richards (1986) also tried to examine the effects of
these components on the comprehension levels. They argued that the if the lecture input had
modifications containing the macro markers which signals the major propositions it improved
the retention of information provided in the lecture and thereby facilitates comprehension. On
the other hand if the modifications had micro- markers which signal the inter-sentential
relations, the framing of segments and pause fillers it did not help in the learner’s retention of
the information in the lecture (Chaudron and Richards, 1986).

It has been testified by the studies that different types of modifications exercise differential
effects on the learners’ proficiency levels. It was reported by Chiang and Dunkel (1992) that
when the redundant information is extended in the discourse it helps in the improvement of
comprehension for the advanced learners. On the other hand such a modification does not
have a considerable impact on the learners of the lower level listening proficiency. Thus the
impact of the modification of speech might have different effects at the different stages of
learning and development. The degree of changes that form a modified input thus still
remains to be defined (Chiang and Dunkel, 1992).

One can conclude that the modified input of any type- the simplified or the elaborated helps
in the process of comprehension. However, one must note that not all types and degree of
adjustments prove to be equally successful. It is difficult to reach any generalization as the
studies conducted differ in their aspects like in their approach to modification (simplification
or elaboration), in respect to the modality (written or spoken), in the assessment methodology
for checking comprehension (multiple choice, dictation etc.) and in the specific examples for
each type of modification (different characteristics of modified input).

On the basis of the findings of the research and case studies discussed one can make
following speculation regarding the modified input: a) rate of speech is slower and the
redundant features at the semantic level have a considerable impact on the increasing of
comprehension; b) the simplification of input may assist in the comprehension for the
learners at the beginner level, c) for advanced level of students the elaborative modification
might prove more successful.

3.5.2 Interactional modification:

60
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

In this kind of linguistic environment both the parties the speaker and the listener modify and
restructure the interaction in order to facilitate the process of comprehension. The role of
interaction in the process of second language acquisition found its origin the study conducted
by Hatch (1978 and 1983). This particular work focused on the importance of the
conversation in the development of grammar. According to her the evolution of language
learning finds its basis in the communicative use and not the otherwise conventional notion
which believe that language learning led to the communicative use. The interactional
modified input also finds its origin in the Krashen’s hypothesis and its claim that regards the
comprehensibility of the input as the essential condition for SLA. This view was further
formalized and enriched by the seminal work of Long (1982, 1983). Long differentiated
between the modified talk directed to the learner and the modified structure of the
conversation itself.

Long (1983) investigated the discourse of both native speaker and non- native speaker and
recognized the strategies that are adopted by both the parties for negotiating through the
channel of discourse. The different strategies that were adopted by the parties included
aspects of conversation like comprehension checks, clarification requests, topic shifts,
repetitions and expansions. These devices help the speakers to avoid problems related to
conversation and assists comprehension when non-understanding sequences tend to damage
the conversation. These adjustments made during the discourse were termed as interactional
modification and later on the same was termed as negotiation (Long, 1983).

The term negotiation is used to indicate the “modification and restructuring of interaction that
occurs when learners and their interlocutors anticipate, perceive, or experience difficulties in
message comprehensibility” (Pica, 1994).

The definition of negotiation was further formalized and improvised by Long in 1996 in the
updated version of Interaction Hypothesis. According to this negotiation is the process in
which the learners and the competent speakers give and understand the signals of their own
as well as their interlocutor’s perceiving comprehension in an attempt to communicate. This
triggers the adjustments in the linguistic form, the structure of conversation, the content of the
message or all of them so as to achieve an acceptable level of understanding (Long, 1996).

According to Long (1982), the modifications in the conversation are likely to happen on the
both the levels- the speaker and the listener so as to make the speech more comprehensible to

61
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

their interlocutors. The need to derive the information from the non- native speaker means
that the competent speaker which might be a native speaker or an advanced non-native
speaker finds it important to attend the feedback from the NNS before he proceeds ahead
with the conversation. According to Long such form of two way exchange of information
adds to the comprehensibility of the input. It helps in the acquisition process better than the
one way flow of information. The NS – NSS modifications been widely studied by many
scholars. Some of the examples that can be considered important contributions are Chaudron
(1983), Ellis, Tanaka & Yamazaki (1994), Gass & Varonis (1994), Long (1982, 1983).

Most of these studies have investigated the ways in which the negotiated interaction assists
the learner in comprehending the second language input. As observed by most of these
studies like Pica et al (1987), Loschky (1994) and Ellis, Tanaka & Yamazaki (1994) there are
three different kinds of input conditions: a) the basic input in which the learners were given
the input that is not modified, b) the pre- modified input in which the learners are provided
the simplified or/ and the elaborated input and c) the interactional modified input in which the
learners were provided the baseline input and had an opportunity for the clarification in case
of difficulty in understanding.

All the three input conditions have been compared and their effects on L2 leaners’
comprehension have been studied. On the basis of these examinations it was found that the
third kind of input condition i.e. the interactional modified input brought about the maximum
comprehension levels. Ellis et al (1994) and Loschky (1994) examined not only examined the
effects of the various types of the linguistic environment on comprehension but also the
relative impact of each of the environments on the process of acquisition. It was found that
each type of input had different effects. Of all the inputs the interactional modified group was
found to play more important role in the acquisition of the new words than the pre- modified
input group. Of the pre-modified and baseline input it was found that the pre- modified input
group was more effective in comprehension than the basic input.

The majority of the studies thus stated that interactional modified input was found to have
more beneficial results over the modified input. However this inference could not be regarded
as universally true. The reason behind this is that in the interactional modified input the
learners had an opportunity to ask the questions for clarification in case of difficulty in
understanding; however the amount of time that this negotiation could take can’t be
quantified. Thus in these studies there could be a possible bias on the account of the time

62
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

factor as interactional modified input might take longer durations of time than the pre-
modified conditions.

The above argument of the biased effectiveness of the interactional modified input on the
account of the time taken by it was further improvised by Ellis (1999) who asserts that it is
difficult to point out whether the favourable benefits of the interactional modified input on
the process of comprehension is due to the kinds of the qualitative differences or the longer
timing and more input (Ellis, 1999).

Another important idea on the theme comes from Aston (1986) who warns against the
generally believed presumption that more heavily modified interaction doesn’t necessarily
leads p the better quality of input production for the learner. He emphasizes that the higher
number of ‘trouble shooting procedure’ doesn’t imply that the acquisition process is more
appropriate with the negotiation of greater meaning. Thus one must pay more attention on the
quality of the negotiation rather than the quantity as the quality of negotiation tends to
exercise more impact on the comprehension rather than the frequency of the negotiation
procedures (Aston, 1986).

The interactional modification for making the input comprehensible is certainly an important
feature in second language acquisition because when the learners are presented with an input
which is beyond their levels of comprehension, they can negotiate the comprehensibility of
the input through the clarification requests, demands for repetition and reformulation.
However, there is no clarity on such interactional adjustments in the teacher-led classroom,
though there have been multiple studies conducted on the subject (Long, 1983).

The current research study aims to discuss the linguistic adjustments in the teacher talk which
come under the formal features and not functional features. So the research will focus more
on the formal features instead of the functional features in the following sections.

3.6 Linguistic adjustments

3.6.1 Parameters for linguistic adjustments:

Chaudron (1988) offers a number of ways by which teachers make adjustments in their
speech depending on the competence of the students they address. Some of the adjustments
are:

63
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

 Pauses
 Vocabulary
 Address
 Rate of speech

Pauses: Chaudron (1988) studies both the occurrence of pauses in the teacher talk as well as
the reasons for their occurrence. He points out that the pauses are brought about in the teacher
talk due to these reasons:
a) as a consequence of the attempt to be extra careful while articulation of speech;
b) as the teachers dedicate time on planning for the modification to be brought in their
speech in accordance to the students’ competence and needs;
c) as an aid for comprehension, thereby providing more time to process the information
delivered during the lesson (Chaudron, 1988).

In addition to these, the pauses have another important role to play. They encourage the use
of the target language by the students. Chaudron analysed the pauses according to their total
number, uses and length (Chaudron, 1988).

Vocabulary (token type ratios and polysyllabic words)

The vocabulary used by the teachers also reflects the modifications made by the teachers in
teacher talk. The measurement of vocabulary can be done by calculating the token-type ratio
which is the ratio between the total numbers of words measured and the occurrence of the
different words in the speech. Thus the nearer the token type ratio is to 1, the more complex
the text would appear to be on the account of the different words used in it. A polysyllabic
word is generally a word which consists of 3 or more syllables in it as per the pronunciation
exhibited by the teacher. The size and occurrence of polysyllabic word is important for
establishing the unit of measurement for the calculation of rate of speech. The teachers were
found to make adjustments in both the range of vocabulary they used and the length of their
words depending on the language level of the group they are addressing (Chaudron, 1988).

Address

Address shows who talks to whom i.e. whom in particular the teachers address their input and
how often. This is an important aspect in the analysis of classroom language and teacher talk.

64
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

In order to further analyse the units of the spoken discourse Chaudron offers some
definitions. He defines an “utterance” as:
“… a string of speech by one speaker under a single intonation contour and preceded and
followed by another speaker’s speech or a pause of X seconds.” (Chaudron 1988, p. 45)

and a “turn” as:

“… any speaker’s sequence of utterances bounded by another speaker’s speech.” (Chaudron

1988, p. 45)

According to the above definitions it can be said that for the “utterance” the address is
superordinate whereas for the “turn” the address is subordinate.

Rate of speech

The rate of speech is the number of words per minute. However the definition is not
considered as satisfactory by Tauroza and Allison who consider that for the purpose of
assessing the rate of speech, syllables should be used as the units of measurement rather than
the words. Thus rather than words per minute the rate of speech can be measured as syllables
per minute or syllable per second (Tauroza and Allison, 1990).

3.6.2 Methodological issues in linguistic adjustments:

The different methodological approaches that have been used for the investigation of the
classroom studies have been reviewed by Long (1980). The two broad approaches as
highlighted by him are interaction analysis which involves the measurement of frequencies
with classroom events and the anthropological observation which involves the observation of
the classroom by an observer/ researcher whose understanding determines the analysis (Long,
1980).

Most of the researchers consider the analysis of the interaction as a significant method of
research especially in terms of the provision of input for acquisition rather than as attempts to
achieve specific linguistic aims. The study conducted by Chomsky (1960) examined the
motherese and the linguistic input provided for the first language acquisition. The work
conducted by him on the speech patterns exhibited by the young children influenced the
scholarly studies in the mid- 1970s which worked on the investigation of the environmental
assistance provided to the second language learner. These research studies triggered the

65
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

investigation on the comprehensibility of input by examination of the “talk” that is addressed

to the second language learner. These research studies aimed to recognize the formal and
interactional features that can influence the second language acquisition and suggested that
the teacher talk was notably different from the normal speech of instruction (Larsen-Freeman
&Long 1991).

Furthermore research on linguistic input to SL learners seeks to determine how speech

addressed to non-native speakers, whether children or adults, differs from language used in
adult native speaker conversation, and whether the difference aids the language learning and
comprehension and/or the language acquisition. Also, some of the work is motivated by
sociolinguistic interest in describing what Ferguson (1971) has called one of the
‘conventionalized varieties of “simplified” speech available to a speech community’ (cited in
Larsen-Freeman & Long, 1991). It was at this time that the term ‘foreigner talk’ (FT) was
coined as “a socially conditioned speech variety- ungrammatical when addressing NNSs”.
The ungrammaticality was the result of three main processes: omission, expansion, and
replacement (Larsen-Freeman &Long 1991).

The other researches on the topic also confirmed that FT was well- formed though a modified
version of the target language. This modified version of FT has features like simple
syntactical structures, frequent use of concrete vocabulary, and frequent use of prosodic and
paralinguistic devices in order to make the input more comprehensible.

According to Chaudron (1988) there are certain theoretical concerns regarding the L2 teacher
speech in the classrooms. The concerns brings to the fore the fact that the L2 teacher speech
might differ in form either from L1 speech or NS speech to NNS in the non- academic
setting.

“On various comparisons, teacher talk in L2 classrooms differs from speech in other contexts,
but the differences are not systematic, nor are they qualitatively distinct enough to constitute
a special sociolinguistic domain, as has been argued for the case of foreigner talk”
(Chaudron, 1988,54-55)

The several factors which tend to predict deviant input and grammaticality or
ungrammaticality to NNSs as put forth by Long (1981) can be summarised as follows:

66
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

According to Long (1981), there are several factors which tend to predict deviant input and
grammaticality or ungrammaticality to NNSs:

1. Prior FT experience.
2. Perceived or genuinely higher social status of the NS.
3. Zero or very low SL proficiency of the NNS.
4. Spontaneity of the conversation.

Conversation Analysis (CA)

This is one of analysis techniques that has been much in vogue in the 2000s and is adopted by
most of the contemporary descriptive studies. This technique brought to light some of the
unexplored but important features of TT. In the 1980s and 1990s many of the descriptive
studies that were conducted focused solely on the teachers’ speech in the classroom.
Conversation Analysis studies differ from these studies as it investigates the entire process of
conversation discourse which involves teacher talk, student talk, and turn-taking mechanisms.
Due to this methodology many of the important and pragmatic features of teacher talk like
corrective feedback/recast, scaffolding, latching, and teacher echo have been explored by the
researchers (Walsh, 2002; Brown, 2007; Ewert, 2009).

Initiation-Response-Feedback (IRF)

The Initiation-Response-Feedback (IRF) model which is the three stage model was formally
proposed by Tannen and owes its origin to the study conducted by Sinclair & Coulthard
(1975) where the IRF pattern was first recognized. Walsh (2010) also refers to the IRF
pattern when he discusses the different difficulties that are faced by the learners in the ESL
classroom. The utility of IRF patterns is highlighted by the scholar who claims that
understanding of IRF pattern helps to deals with the different problems faced by the learners
like initiating and taking part in a discussion, listening and speaking at the same time.

Language chunks

For the identification and the understanding of the patterns, the spoken English language in a
corpus like the British National Corpus (BNC) must be examined. In addition to these the
conversational activities like turn-taking can be analysed. The items such as coherence, turn
length, flexibility, automaticity and hesitancy were used traditionally for the analysis of
spoken fluency as these items determine the potential of the learner to use or retrieve the

67
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

chunks of language or fixed formula effectively. There are a range of interactional activities
(like questioning techniques) that are used by the fluent speakers so as to ensure that the
listener follows the meaning of conversation as intended. The examination of spoken corpus
helps to understand the interactional structure of the proficient language. This indeed helps
the learners increase their interactional competence (Lennon, 1990).

The use of those fixed or semi-fixed expressions, clusters or lexical bundles that are referred
to as language chunks, are evidently seen to be used by proficient and fluent speakers who
access these ready- made chunks as per their requirement. The examination of the corpus
reveals how the same chunks are used over and over by the speaker. When these chunks are
viewed as lexical items they can be incorporated into the vocabulary syllabus. This indeed
can offer learners with a range of core spoken language functions such as vagueness (things
like that), discourse marking (I mean, you know) and politeness ( do you mean, I don’t know
if…). The examination of the corpus for investigating teacher talk unfolds a number of new
horizons. The researcher can analyse the samples of the language in the broader context and
identify the modifications, simplifications and deviations in the light of the standard patterns
(Lennon, 1990)

However, such an extensive and exhaustive approach to investigate the TT is more suitable
for a doctoral investigation rather than a Masters level study. Given the relatively prescribed
scale of this study, the current investigation includes the discussion of this approach just in
the literature review and not in the methodology and analysis.

68
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

Chapter 4

Research Methodology

4.1 Participants or Subjects

The subjects for this case study are four teachers at the intermediate level. These teachers
who volunteered to participate in the study are from the British Council. Of them, three
teachers are native and one is non-native speaker of the English language. The letters of
introduction and explanation of the research intent were mailed to the participating teachers
well in advance. All the teachers were qualified and experienced. The teachers’ length of
teaching experience ranges from 5 to 27 years. Apart from their experience the teachers were
well qualified. The two of the teachers had a Master’s degree and other two exhibited the
required professional skills, qualification and development. All participating teachers conduct
classes at various levels. The intermediate level was chosen as appropriate for the current
study. The intermediate English level was chosen because in its form and function it

69
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

preconditions sufficient amount of teacher talk. The sufficient amount of teacher talk during
the classroom discourse allows the researcher to bring to the observation the entire range of
adjustments and modifications made by the teacher. After consultations and visits to the
teachers’ workplace to gather introductory data, it was found that the teachers were
remarkably amenable to allowing a researcher into their classrooms. The participating
teachers were accommodating and appeared comfortable with themselves as teachers and
interested in the study and its potential for improving their teaching.

4.2 Data collection and method

The two main methods of data collection that will be employed in this study are shown in
Figure 1.

Main sources of
data

digitally recorded audio taped post

observations of 4 observational
teachers interviews

Figure 1: Data Collection Methodology

The data was recorded on a digital recorder. The observer (in all the cases, the author) sat at a
discreet position operating the digital recorder. The presence of the author/ observer did not
result in any disturbance to the classroom discourse process as the author was known
personally to all the teachers. Her presence was being notified to all the teachers and the
students in the class in advance and hence it really did not tamper with the original teaching-
learning process that takes place in the class. The tapes ranged in length from 45 to 50
minutes.
The observations provide a narrative account of the lesson in three stages, from
introduction to conclusion, so that the structure, content and manner of classroom talk of the
teachers in the study could be mapped onto this narrative. These three stages are shown
below.

The 3-stage sequence in the lesson

70
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3

Introduction/recall of Instruction/ transmission of Conclusion/ assignment
knowledge information feedback
Figure

The lessons were digitally recorded. These recordings were then transcribed word for word
by the observer. The transcriptions written by the observer also included the comments and
observations made by the observer at the field.

The observations made during the classroom discourse were followed by interviews with the
teachers. The teachers who were interviewed were same as the lessons of which were
observed. This was done in order to elicit the data that would cast light on the reasons (if any)
of linguistic modifications that the ESL teachers employ in the classroom setting. The data
obtained through interviewing the teachers ranged from 45 to 50 minutes long. It was also
transcribed verbatim and presented in two columns; placing the transcription in left column
and leaving a blank column on the right for initial within-case analysis. Pseudonyms were
assigned to all of the participants who were interviewed so to protect their confidentiality.
The semi-structured interviews that followed the Observations were done with a purpose. It
was done on the one hand, to ensure that the British Council teachers support the ideas
manifested in the study and understand the researcher framework of the study , and on the
other hand to accumulate some valuable comments and remarks from the teachers.

4.3 Data Analysis Tools

Recording Device
The whole process of the teaching-learning was digitally recorded. The recordings reflect
what actually happens inside the classroom. The 4 teachers’ classroom talks were recorded
using the audio tapes. Later on, a detailed transcription of the audio tape recordings was
made.
A digital voice recorder was used to record all of the interviews. The data was downloaded
to a computer after each interview. I assigned a login password to the computer storing the
data to ensure the confidentiality of the interview information. The records were transcribed
and kept in a digital data file format for possible future publication. Identification information
of all the participants was removed at the time of transcriptions.

Interview

71
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

I conducted an approximately 30 minute individual interview with each of the 4 participants.

The conversations were digitally recorded during the individual interviews. Before the initial
interview, I prepared a list of potential questions considering the literature, the purpose of
study, the results from the pilot study conducted in a similar manner, and other questions
based on respondent’s characteristics. The list of questions was revised as the data collection
progressed, depending on the emerging themes from earlier phases of data collection, to
create a better flow of conversation. I met with each participant at least twice for the data
collection. The first time was the interview; the second time was a follow-up session. I felt
that all participants were helpful, eager to provide their experiences for the research, and
honestly answering my questions.

4.4 Data Analysis

The subjects were closely analysed on the basis of the pre- set parameters of the linguistic
modifications. All the transcripts that were obtained from the classroom observation of
teacher talk were divided into utterances. In order to do so we follow the definition of
utterance as propounded by Crookes (1990).

“A complete thought usually expressed in a connected grouping of words, which is separated

from the other utterances on the basis of content, intonation contour and/ or pausing. (i)
Content. A change in content is used as one criterion for segmenting utterances… (ii)
Intonation Contour. A falling intonation contour signals the end of an utterance. A rising
intonation signals the end of an utterance if it is a question… (iii) Pauses. Pauses are used in
conjunction with the above two criteria to segment utterances.”

Once the transcripts were divided into utterances, each of the utterances was closely
scrutinized for the presence or the absence of the linguistic characteristics that have been
brought into light by the previous ESL research studies. The data analysis of the
transcriptions aimed to investigate if the teachers in the sample display the teacher talk
characteristics described in the work of researchers cited in the literature review. The table
below lists all the parameters of the characteristics that were expected to be identified.

Phonology 1. Slow rate of delivery

2. Use of stress and pauses
3. Careful articulation
4. Use of full forms/avoidance of contractions

72
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

5. Extra stress on nouns

Syntax 1. Well-formed utterances/few disfluencies
2. Few adjectival, adverbial and noun clauses, few relative
clauses and appositives
3. Use of canonical word order
4. Overt marking of grammatical relations
5. Verbal marked for present/few for non-present temporal
reference
6. Yes-no and intonation questions/few wh-questions
7. New information at the end of the sentence
8. Repetition or restatement
Semantics 1. Overt marking of semantic relations
2. Lower type-token ratio
3. Few idiomatic expressions
4. High average lexical frequency of nouns and verbs
5. High proportion of linking verbs to total verbs
6. Marked use of lexical items
7. Great preference for full noun phrase over pronouns
8. Use of concrete verbs over weak verbs, like do

The data analysis of the transcriptions was followed by the analysis of the interviews. The
results of the individual interviews were analysed by using a qualitative framework. The six-
step procedure reported by Miles and Hubreman (1994) was employed. The steps I followed
were:
1. Data Collection
2. Data Reduction
3. Data Display
4. Conclusion drawing
5. Conclusion Testing
6. Final Reporting
After the interview, the teachers’ opinions on the whole framework of the research study was
assessed by following them up with the general questionnaire about teacher talk. These
questions aimed to deduce the teacher’s opinions about the linguistic modifications made in
the speech and their importance (See Appendix B).
73
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

4.5 Stages of Methodology

The study examines the pattern of the teacher-talk among the different teachers and attempts
to confirm the existence of the linguistic register particular to the classroom speech of ESL
teacher identified by other researchers.. Specifically, in order to accomplish its objective, it
seeks to do three things.

 Firstly, it describes and quantifies various adjustments of the speech addressed by

ESL teachers to second language learners, i.e. the input. These adjustments are
recorded on the parameters of the linguistic adjustments explained during the
literature review.
 Secondly, it compares the similarities and differences in linguistic adjustments found
among the teachers that were observed by attributing these adjustments to the three
stages of lessons observed.
 Thirdly, it investigates the degree to which the linguistic properties of teacher-talk
(TT) in this corpus are representative, by comparing them with the results of the other
researcher’s investigation of linguistic adjustments of input.

The paper then concludes with a summary of findings and a few statements concerning their
implications for the ESL classroom.

74
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

Chapter 5

Results and Analysis

Data Analysis

The analysis of the data aims to seek the answers of the research questions that guide our
research.

5) What adjustments of phonology, syntax, and semantics do the teachers in the study
use in their classrooms?
6) Can these adjustments be attributed to three stages of lessons observed?
7) Can these adjustments be categorised according to teacher talk language
classifications as described by researchers working in this field?
8) What reasons can the teachers identify for any linguistic adjustments they make?

5.1 Result and analysis for Question 1

In this research study the transcripts of the four teachers are closely scrutinized and analysed
for the different linguistic adjustments made by them. Each of the transcripts closely notes
down the observation made during all the stages of the classroom. The observations of the
transcripts are attached in the Appendix section of the report.

The linguistic adjustments made by the four teachers we observed during the classroom
discourse can be further grouped into the four categories for our better understanding: the
adjustments in phonology, morphology/sematic relations, syntax and lexicon. The table

75
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

below lists the different linguistic adjustments that were identified in the teacher’s input of
the classes observed.

List of linguistic adjustments made by the Teachers

Phonology Clear articulation

Normal rate of delivery
Natural frequency of stressed words
Normal pauses between utterances
Natural intonation

Morphology and Semantics Use of contractions as opposed to full forms

No use of inflections
Less infinitive verb forms
Few idiomatic expression
High average lexical frequency of nouns and
verbs
High proportion of linking verbs to total
verbs
Use of concrete verbs over weak verbs, like
do
Syntax Short sentences
More stereotyped stock expressions- “well”,
really”
Few adjectival, adverbial and noun clauses,
few relative clauses and appositives
Less subordinate clauses
No overt simplified grammar
Well- formed utterances
Canonical word order
More yes/no intonation questions
Simplified negation
Frequent repetition and restatement

Lexicon Marked use of lexical items

76
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

Lower type-token ratio

Smaller Vocabulary
Use of more generic terms rather than
specific
Use of foreign vocabularies
No complex words

The adjustments made by all the teachers in their speech were more or less same and shared a
common framework. Most of the teachers that were observed shared some common
characteristics in their input. These common attributes can be summarised as follows.

 There was no over use of forms unless to focus on syntax/word order to ensure that
students get a natural model of the language. 
 There was no extra slow-down of pace. The rate of delivery was normal so to provide
a natural model and help learners get more exposure to "authentic" English. 
 The complexities in the grammatical relations were avoided. The complex
grammatical structures and words were not used especially with lower levels
(Elementary and Pre-Intermediate) to avoid demotivating learners. However there was
no overly simplified production of sentences.
 There was no use of wrong/over simplified grammar.
 The lexical variations were low indicating a lower type token ratio.
 The idiomatic expressions used in the class were few in order to avoid the learner’s
de-motivation. 
 The interaction process between the teachers and students was direct. Concise/direct
talk while giving instructions and feedback was followed by all as it is essential that
learners are on track in these sections lessons and maintain smooth continuity of
lesson/learning process. 
 There was frequent restatement and repetition. Repetition and restatement served as
comprehension checks. It helped to clarify meaning of complex/abstract terms/notions
and to provide learners more exposure to target language.

77
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

 The articulation in all the cases was found to be clear.

 The intonation was natural. Natural intonation/stress/articulation helped to provide
clear/natural models even in presentation of new language.

However the above table cannot be taken as a blueprint of linguistic adjustments made by all
the teachers who were observed. There were apparent differences in the linguistic
adjustments made by the teacher. For example: one of our teachers was found to use more
simplified negations than the other. The short sentences were used with more use of full
forms over contractions. Similarly one teacher used more ‘wh’ questions than others. In some
of the teacher’s input there were more pauses, whereas in others there was more stress on the
words. The rate of speech also showed degrees of variance. The variability in the teachers’
input in the ESL classroom raises another question before us that what is the reason for this
difference in the teachers’ input of the same genre.

5.2 Result and analysis for Question 2

It was observed that not all the four teachers showed the similar adjustments in their language
input. This dissimilarity in the adjustments made in the teacher’s input can be attributed to the
different stages of the lesson. As discussed before in the methodology the three stages of
lesson on which we can base our observations on are as follows:

Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3

Introduction/ recall of Instruction/ transmission of Conclusion/ assignment
knowledge information feedback

The differences and similarities between the adjustments made by the teachers could thus be
better analysed when we observed all the three stages of the classroom discourse. When we
deeply studied the different stages in the classroom it was found that the linguistic
adjustments made by each of the teachers in all the 3 stages showed some degree of variance.
The individual observations are made for each of the teachers during the different stages in
the classroom is tabulated.

On the basis of the detailed study of the transcriptions and audiotapes of the lessons by the
different teachers we observed it was found that though there was a common pattern of the
linguistic modifications made by the teachers like the slow rate of delivery in the beginning,

78
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

natural intonation, no overt simplification of grammatical construction, lower type token

ratio, preference for the canonical word order, the use of less complex and direct sentences
etc. , the linguistic modifications made by the four teachers notably showed some variations.

Teacher 1 (T1) was found to be more fluent in her speech. The sentences were short but the
rate of delivery was maintained at the normal level right from the beginning. T1 was also
found to make use of contractions in her speech over the full forms. There are also few
idiomatic expressions that characterize her teacher talk. The talk is natural with no
exaggeration in forms. E.g.-

T1: Morning. You winter takes on, Banun, your arms?! Really gold this morning.
No problem.
Excuse me, let me get the IT guys, it’s not working right. (Goes to call for help)
Everyone had lovely day on Thursday?
You what? You were sick, I know it is horrible.

Teacher 2 (T2) was found to make use of more stereotyped expressions like “yeah” and
tended to self- repeat more than the other teachers in their lessons. There was also use of
“Ok” for much of the questioning. It was also found that his speech was more marked with
pauses. The pauses in the speech were more even in the second stage of the lesson. However,
the language model was more closely aligned with the authentic language. E.g.-

T2: Yeah yeah..on the sea…yeah yeah yeah, thank you Massa. No, no, no, it could be
experienced teacher, experienced, doctor, experienced drinker, - anything. “Rower” is
someone who rows, yeah… again the verb is “r-o-w”, ok?

TT of Teacher 3 (T3) was marked with the use of “OK” as imperative and questioning. There
was also evident use of foreign vocabulary terms in the speech. The helping verbs were found
to be omitted in some instances for the syntactic simplicity. E.g.-

T 3: Ok, Let’s start as usual. We missing the chair. Mina, you can come and bring the chair
with you. Ok, Yana is not gonna come and watch today, remember yesterday, we had the
student from AUS, she is not gonna watch, because she is recording me, so everything I say
she is listening to from here. Ok? So I have to be nice to you. All right. I have Meena from
this group, aaand Zahra. Meena can you sit here…(Laugh as a reply to student’s replica)..
All right, one two, three..go…

79
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

TT of Teacher 4 (T4) in the classroom was marked with lot of other repetitions and
paraphrasing. There was also a good use of exclamatory expressions. The question tags were
also used for questioning. The pauses between the utterances were founded to be longer.

T 3: Aham… Ok Amican..aha…Zaeed…”g” yes…Did you say isn’t it? That was perfect!!!
That was amazing!! That was absolutely brilliant!!! Very few students use auxiliary verbs like
that… that was …

The speech of T4 also contained certain disfluencies. E.g.-

I’ve had just finished my dinner when the door bell rang” so you’re going ttt…tttt..tttt… Let
me put it on the board and show you. Oh..what’s happened?...

All the teachers that were observed exhibited different linguistic modifications in the
different stages of the classroom discourse. The detailed account of these observations is
charted in the forms of tables which lists the linguistic modifications made by each of these
teachers in each of the stages of lesson. The tables are attached in the Appendix section of the
report.

As evident from the observation tables of the 4 teachers it can be said that there have been
different linguistic adjustments made by the teachers during the different stages of the lesson.
Apparently there has been some variance in the semantics, phonology and syntax. These
differences can be attributed to a great degree to the different stages of the classroom. Though
there is not a fixed pattern that has been followed by all the teachers in the different stages of
the classroom, there are common aspects of the linguistic adjustments that have been made
by all the teachers in the different stages of the classroom.

Stage 1:
In the first stage of the lesson where the teacher was involved with the introduction of the
topic accompanied with the quick recall it was observed that the class tended to be slower as
the rate of delivery was comparatively slower than the other stages. It was found that the
enunciations were clearer and there were more frequent pauses. The use of imperatives was
evident and there was more self-repetition to ensure the comprehension. In the first stage
there were more use tensed verbs. There were fewer auxiliary verb forms. There were very
few adjectival, adverbial and noun clauses, relative clauses and appositives. There was no use
of complex words. There was less use of subordinate clauses. The utterances were well
formed. There was evidently less use of concrete verbs over weak verbs, like do. The

80
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

sentences were short with simplified grammatical relations. Vocabulary used was simple with
very few idiomatic expressions. There were few words from foreign vocabulary as well.

Stage 2 & 3: In the second and the third stage where the teacher was involved with the main
body of the lesson i.e. the transmission of information and the conclusion of the assignment it
was found that the teacher’s input was more in line with the authentic language model. The
rate of delivery was normal and the transmission of information took place at a normal pace.
The articulation, intonation and pauses were natural with no exaggeration involved. There
were few adjectival, adverbial and noun clauses, few relative clauses and appositives and no
complex words. There was evidently some use of concrete verbs over weak verbs, like do.
The sentences were short but there were a few subordinate and relative clauses as well. There
was repetition and restatement with yes/no intonation questions. The questions tags were also
used as confirmations and comprehension checks. The sentences were not very short. Though
there were no complex grammatical relations involved in the sentence production but the
over-simplification of the grammatical relations was also not being done. The vocabulary was
simple with frequent words from the common parlance but there were few words from
foreign vocabulary as well.

Even the interviews conducted for the analysis threw light on the similar observations. The
teachers opined that they tended to scale down their levels of language when teaching the
students at the beginner level. Some teachers even accepted the use of mother tongue to
facilitate comprehension at the lower level. Most of them agreed to be more careful while
addressing the students at the lower level; however with the intermediate and higher level
their use of language was more natural. This model was adopted as the teachers felt that at
the higher levels when the students are exposed to the language beyond their understanding it
triggers the clarification requests from them which indeed is an essential for language
acquisition.

The information extracted from the teachers regarding the linguistic modifications they
adopted in their teacher talk and the observations that were made by the analysis of the
audiotaped transcripts of the lessons can be summarised as follows:

 The teacher talk at the beginner’s level was characterized with the simplicity of the
language. The linguistic adjustments were made in the speech with level toned down a
bit to the level of the students.

81
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

 The teacher talk at the intermediate and higher level was more fluent and there were
fewer adjustments in linguistic forms of the speech.
 According to the teachers there were more “Yes/No” questions than Wh-questions at
the lower levels of teaching. The sentences were made shorter so that the students can
arrive to the meaning.
 There was more use of concrete verbs than the weak verbs on the lower levels.
 In the introduction or recall of knowledge stage the teacher talk was aimed to be more
direct and concise. There was evident use of simplified language. It is just direct
graded, exactly what they need to do. However, when it came to
instruction/transmission of information the talk became less clear, less graded, less
simplified.
 In the introductory part of the lesson, the teachers were found to use clearer
articulation but they were more natural and not very careful.
 The words were stressed more in the beginning of the lesson which reduced as the
discourse proceeded further.
 The pauses between the utterances are also witnessed more in the beginning of the
lesson than the later stages.
 The rate of speech delivery was slower in the introductory part but the rate of delivery
regained its normal rate in the second and the third stage.
 The repetitions both self and other repetitions are more frequent in the beginning of
the lesson, however the number of repetitions too reduce in the next two stages of the
class.
 In the beginning of the lesson, the sentences were found to be very short, direct and
graded whereas in the second and the third stage of the lesson the sentences were
relatively longer but not complex.
 In the beginning of the lesson there was evidently the use of full forms as opposed to
contractions, however in the second and the third stages the contractions are used
more.
 The intonation was maintained to be natural in all the three stages. There was no
usage of complex words. Also there were no un- grammatical features found in all the
stages of the lesson on the account of grammatical simplification.

82
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

Thus the difference in the linguistic adjustments made by the teacher can be attributed to a
great degree to the different stages of lesson learning. It was found that the teachers followed
a more simplified register of language in the beginning of the lessons; but as the lessons
learning slid down to the next two stages after the introduction, it picked up the pace in which
the teachers were found to be more close to the authentic model of language.

It is to be noted that the variance in linguistic adjustments made by the teacher can be
attributes to the different stages of lessons to a great deal but the subjective preference of an
individual also plays an important role which cannot be denied. The cognitive aspects that
determine the nature of students and teacher also seem to play an important role in the
presentation of the language. It is on account of this aspect that not all the teachers and the
classes we observed followed the similar linguistic register across the stages of their lesson
teaching-learning process. However as this behavioural aspects are not quantifiable they
cannot lead us to any conclusions.

The teachers did make a few of the linguistic adjustments to facilitate the students’
lesson/learning process, but the adjustments made in the input did not inhibit the student’
exposure to “authentic” English. The stress, the intonation, the articulation was natural. There
was no over use of forms unless to focus on syntax; the input was more close to the natural
model of language. It avoided the grammatical complexities as well as overt simplification of
semantic relations. Overall, the presentation of the new language was done in the natural and
clear framework of the language.

5.3 Result and analysis for Question 3

The domain of teacher talk and the linguistic adjustments has been deeply studied by the
researchers, educationists and scholars. As we have discussed in the literature review there
have been many categorization proposed for the linguistic adjustments in TT. The linguistic
adjustments that we have observed in our sample teacher can be classified in accordance with
the classifications proposed by the researchers working in this field.

Almost all of the research findings on the subject have classified the linguistic adjustments on
the basis of phonology, syntax, and semantics of the utterance. The modifications that we
have studied also fall under the similar headings; however apart from phonology, syntax, and
semantics we have added a new category to the classification the “Lexicon” in order to
facilitate a better understanding of the words- sets that are used in the utterances.

83
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

The new features in the teacher talk that have been found by our observations of the teacher
talk in the classroom setting falls under the “lexicon”. These features can be summarised as
follows:

1. The teachers were found to make use of more generic terms rather than specific terms.
2. There was recurrent use of basic vocabulary in the sentences.
3. The words from the foreign vocabularies were also incorporated in the TT.
4. No complex words were used.
5. There were more stereotyped stock like expressions- “well”, really”, “yeah”, “oh”.

The features that characterize the teacher talk in ESL classroom have been widely studied by
the different research scholars, of which the investigation by Long (1991) plays an important
role. The features studied by the current study are also found to be similar to Long’s (1991)
study on the subject. The similarities between the current study and the previous studies on
the subject can be put forth as follows:

1. The sentences used by the teacher are short, simple and direct.
2. The complex sentences are avoided. There are fewer subordinate clauses.
3. The use of adjectival, adverbial and noun clauses, relative clauses and appositives is
very few in number.
4. The utterances are well- formed.
5. There is frequent repetition and restatement. Frequent statements and imperatives are
used. General questions are used rather than special questions.
6. Degree of subordination is low.
7. The declaratives and statements are used more often rather than questions.
8. A preference for the canonical word order is seen.
9. There is also use of simplified negation with the yes/ no questions.
10. There is use of concrete verbs over weak verbs, like do is
11. The proportion of linking verbs to total verbs is generally high.
12. The average lexical frequency of nouns and verbs is found to be high.
13. The lexical variations are low indicating to the low type- token ratio.
14. The idiomatic expressions are very few.

The linguistic modifications in our study were found to be quite similar to the studies
conducted by the previous researchers working in the field. However there were notable
variations which differentiate the current findings from the previous findings. For the
84
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

previous findings we take into the account the research conducted by scholars like Henzl
(1979), Terrell (1980), Kelch (1985), Ferguson (1971), Larsen-Freeman and Long (1991) ( as
quoted in Xuewen, 2003).

Of all these studies Larsen-Freeman and Long (1991) is considered to be the most significant
and influential and hence the conclusions that were drawn by their investigation guides the
findings that we list under the heading “previous studies”. These differences between the
findings of our study and the study conducted by the previous researchers can be put forth as
follows:

Differences in findings

Previous studies Current study

1. It was found that the rate of 1. It is found that the rate of speech is slower in the
delivery is slower and teachers beginning of the lesson but normal in the second and
were less fluent third stage of the lesson.
2. The more use of stress and 2. Stress and pauses were found to be normal and
pauses was reported. the frequency of their occurrence was also natural.
3. The articulation were found to 3. Articulation was clearer but not very careful and
be deliberate and more careful deliberate.
4. It was found that teacher put 4. There was no extra stress on noun
extra stress on nouns
5. There was wider pitch range/ 5. Intonation was found to be natural in all the four
exaggerated intonation cases studied with no exaggeration.
6. More use of full forms and 6. The use of full forms over the contractions was
avoidance of contractions was studied in the beginning stage of the lesson but there
reported. was well- marked use of contractions in the latter
7. More overt marking of stages observed.
grammatical and sematic 7. No overt simplification of grammatical relations
relations is reported. and semantic is observed.

5.4 Result and analysis for Question 4:

85
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

The linguistic modifications that are adopted by the teachers in their talk owe a great deal to
the important role played by them as an aid to comprehension. Most of the teachers
consciously or unconsciously adopt these modifications in their speech. There are many
reasons for which the TT is characterized by certain linguistic modifications. The interview
that we conducted with the teachers threw light on some of the reasons for the linguistic
modifications. It was reported by the teacher that the adjustments in the speech helps to bring
about comprehension.

The teachers reported that the usage of shorter sentences helped the students to arrive at
meaning when they are instructing them while setting up any activities. Similarly the
simplification of sentences, concise and direct talk facilitated the comprehensibility. One of
the teachers also accepted to make the use of L1 in her speech occasionally when something
was unclear to the students. The use of concrete verbs over the weak verbs was also made
much use of by the teachers as it was perceived that the students are likely to be aware so
such collocations.

The rate of delivery was kept slower than usual by the teachers for the students at beginner
level so that the students are able to catch up with the pace of teacher’s speech. There would
be a lot of repetitions usually at the beginning of the lesson as the students need to know
what kind of language might be frequently used by the teacher to set up the activities in the
classroom. The repetitions are also considered important by the teachers as the when the
course is started the students that the teacher address to are those that are met for the first
time and hence the teacher needs to repeat many a times so that the students grapple with
their speech by time. Later on, the repetitions tend to reduce as the students get comfortable
with the speech and they know the system and which might words the teacher might be
using.

The teachers did pay a lot of attention to the language used when dealing with the low level
students and the language was adjusted to their levels of competence as the teacher believed
that the natural flow of language might overwhelm the students. However, with the higher
level the teachers kept their speech close to the natural model of language as it is important
for the students to notice the natural texture of language. With the higher level students there
was also a possibility that the students can ask or put forth a clarification request in case they
don’t understand.

86
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

The pauses were also used as a form of modification especially at the lower levels due to the
important role it plays in the process of learning. The pauses between the turns gave an
opportunity to check if the students are nodding and catching up with what is being said.
Pauses in the speech also facilitate comprehension as more time is provided to the learner for
the processing of the information. In addition to these, the pauses have another important
role to play. They encourage the use of the target language by the students.

The difference in the linguistic adjustments across the different stages in the classroom was
also accepted by the teachers we interviewed. It was reported by them that the simplification
of the language was adopted in the beginning of the session so as to enable the student do
what is expected in the session. In the beginning the language is direct graded, concise and
simple so that all the students understand what to do.

However the language adopted in the latter stages of lesson was more natural as the teachers
felt that the exposure to the authentic language was important for the student. The language
by the teacher is not graded during the transmission of information as the teacher is ought to
be model for the students especially in the cases like interaction or role play. The gradation of
language is also determined by the topic under discussion like the language is also graded and
direct if the topic under discussion is the explanation of the lexical item or grammar.

Paraphrasing was also used evidently by the teachers along with repetitions because it was
perceived by the teachers that if the students didn’t understand the first thing they might
understand another one. When the same thing said in several different ways it exposes them
to the different variations in the language. Repetitions and paraphrasing were the most
frequently used linguistic modifications.

The teachers accepted the use of basic words especially in the beginning of the classroom as
they felt that the students must be familiar with the words spoken by the teacher so as to
ensure comprehension. The idiomatic expressions are kept few in number and if they were
used the teacher reported the explanation the term before or/ and after the usage so as to
reinforce the understanding of the new expression and promote its practical usage in their
speech.

On the whole it was accepted by the teachers that the students learn best from the teacher
who uses a perfect blend of “special language” and “authentic” language. The linguistic
modifications that were observed in the TT of the four teachers were a consequence of the

87
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

balancing act of both the languages- special and natural. The aim of the teachers in the
linguistic adjustments made was to provide as much authentic language to the speakers as
they can understand. There are occasions in the classroom discourse which demands the use
of special language and the level toned down a bit to the level of the learners. However, these
acts need to be balanced with enough exposure to the natural model of language.

Chapter 6

Conclusion

6.1 Findings and Implications

Over the years there have been many scholarly studies on the examination of the classroom
proceedings. However there are few studies conducted on the descriptions of the linguistic
adjustments in the ESL classroom. The present study endeavoured to observe the various
linguistic modifications in the speech of the ESL teachers by dwelling on what actually
happens inside the classroom.

The study tried to examine the linguistic adjustments adopted by the ESL teachers in the
classroom on the basis of the premise that the present day ESL classrooms require
Communicative Language Teaching (CLT). In order to investigate the features that
characterize the TT in the classroom the ESL speech of four teachers of English was closely
observed in the classroom setting of British Council, Dubai.

On the basis of the fundamental principle of the communicative language teaching and the
features of TT as examined by the different researchers in the previous studies the study
seeks to explore the answers of the four research questions. All the steps that are undertaken
in the present study investigation revolve around the four exploratory questions in close
consultation with the previous literary studies and grounded in the theoretical framework.

After the data analysis and interpretation the study led to some important findings. It was
found that the linguistic adjustments made by the four teachers that were observed during the
classroom discourse could be further grouped into the four categories for a better
understanding: the adjustments in phonology, morphology/sematic relations, syntax and

88
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

lexicon. The linguistic adjustments made by the teachers in phonology, morphology/sematic

relations, syntax and lexicon were such that it balanced the use of authentic language and
special language.

1) There was no over use of forms unless to focus on syntax/word order, no over stress on
pauses, no over simplification of grammatical relations, no extra slow-down of pace, no
exaggeration in tone and pitch to ensure that students get a natural model of the
language. However the comprehensibility of the input was ensured with the use of
modifications like frequent restatement, repetition and paraphrasing, low lexical variations
indicating a lower type token ratio, few idiomatic expressions, and basic vocabulary. There
was evident usage of short, simple, direct and graded sentences avoiding the complexities in
the grammatical relations.

2) The study also found that though the linguistic modifications adopted by the teachers
shared a common platform, there were variances exhibited in the adjustments made by ESL
teachers which can be understood better when the different stages of the classroom discourse
are closely observed. The analysis of the three stages of the classroom discourse revealed that
the use of special language or “teachery talk” was more evident in the introductory phase of
the lesson but the teachers’ language was more aligned to the natural model in the latter
phases. It was found that the teachers followed a more simplified register of language in the
beginning of the lessons; but in the next two stages after the introduction the ESL speech of
teacher exhibited a pace of delivery in which the teachers were found to be more close to the
authentic model of language.

3) The exploratory study also draws the similarities and differences between the previous
findings contributed by the researchers working in the field and the findings of the present
study. It is found in the current study that the ESL speech of the teachers observed exhibited
similar linguistic modifications as observed by the previous researchers in the beginning of
the lessons. However these modifications in ESL speech reduced with the passage of time in
the classroom discourse i.e. in the latter stages of the lessons as the students develop
familiarity. The study also highlights some of the new features in the teacher talk and studies
it under the category “lexicon” so as to facilitate better understanding.

4) The present study also explores the reasons for the linguistic modifications in the ESL
speech as opined by the teachers. It was found that the teachers deemed these modifications

89
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

in the speech as important to ensure comprehensibility of input- especially at the beginning of

the lesson or with the students at beginner level because the students are unfamiliar with the
language at that point of time. The modifications like repetitions, paraphrases, pauses etc. are
evidently used by the teachers as these adjustments help students in the processing of the
information.

Despite the lengthy process of observation using audio- tapes, the meticulous phase of the
transcription and the rigorous analysis that involved the examination of each of utterances in
the transcription, the classroom observation conducted shall prove to be an event of great
significance. The classroom observation study gives an opportunity to the practicing teachers
to get a better understanding on the characteristics of ESL speech that must be followed.

The recorded material also helps in the generation of the valuable feedback on the
modifications that can be adopted for better learning. The discussion with the observer or
participation in a retrospective analysis of one’s teaching can bring a better understanding of
the strengths and weaknesses in the teaching- learning process. It shall help teachers to
reconsider the linguistic adjustments and modifications of their classroom language to
maximize the quality of the input.

6.2 Limitations and further study

The limitation of the study might be the limitation of the subjects that were studied to draw
findings and analysis. The involvement of simply 4 British Council teachers for the study for
drawing far- reaching conclusions is not feasible. The data thus collected cannot be used to
make generalizations for ESL speech in other institutions. The small sample size can inhibit
the power of the analysis. The study also bases its observations and findings on the classroom
study at intermediate level and the intermediate level is quite high. This limits its application
to the other levels.

The research shall open up further areas of research investigation which has been not been as
prominent in the classroom- centred research study till now. It can lead to a more detailed
study of the precise gradations of linguistic complexities as applicable and effective in the
context of UAE classrooms at the different levels.

The different teachers that are examined in this research have exhibited varying degrees of
teacher talk in their classroom discourse. The present study investigates the changes in the

90
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

linguistic modifications adopted by the ESL teachers across the different stages of the
classroom. It can serve as a foundation to the study that examines the changes in the
linguistic modifications of the different teachers across the different terms i.e. as the students
develop more familiarity and proficiency of language with the passage of time.

The current analysis can also be used further to study the impact of the variations in the
linguistic modifications on the learning of the students. The comprehensibility of the
teachers’ input can be studied in the relation to the output. Another possible orientation of the
future research can be the examination of the effects of teacher talk with respect to the age
sensitivity of students to the Communicative Language Teaching.

91
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

References

Allwright, D. & Bailey, K. 1991. Focus on the language classroom. New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Atkinson, J. Maxwell, & Paul Drew (1979). Order in court. Oxford Socio-Legal Studies.
Atlantic Highlands: Humanities.
Aston, G. (1986). Trouble shooting in interaction with learners: The more the merrier?
Applied Linguistics, 7, 128-143.
Barnes, B. (1985). The pragmatics of left detachment in spoken standard french. Amsterdam:
J. Benjamins.
Brown, H. D. (2007). Teaching by principles: An integrated approach to language pedagogy.
White Plains, NY: Pearson Education.
Celce-Murcia, M. (2001).Teaching English as a second or foreign language (3d Ed.). New
York: Heinle & Heinle.
Chaudron, C. (1983a). Foreigner talk in the classroom – an aid to learning? In H. W. Seliger
& M. Long (Eds.), Classroom-oriented research in language acquisition. Rowley,
MA: Newbury House.
Chaudron, C. (1983b). Simplification of input: Topic reinstatements and their effects on
Three Potential Sources of Comprehensible Input second language learners’
recognition and recall. TESOL Quarterly, 17, 437-458.
Chaudron, C. H. (1988). Second language classrooms: Research on teaching and learning.
New York: Cambridge University Press.
Chaudron, C. H. (1985). Comprehension, comprehensibility, and learning in the second
language classroom. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 7(2), 216-232.
Chaudron, C. H., & Richards, J. C. (1986). The effects of discourse markers on the
comprehension of lectures. Applied Linguistics, 7(2), 113-127.
Chiang, C. S., & Dunkel, P. (1992). The effect of speech modification, prior knowledge, and
listening proficiency on EFL lecture learning. TESOL Quarterly, 26, 345-374..

92
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

Cook, V. (2000). Second language learning and language teaching (2nd Edition). Beijing:
Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Corder, S. P. (1967). The significance of learners’ errors. International Review of Applied
Linguistics, 5, 161-170.
Crookes, G. (1990). The utterance and other basic units for second language discourse
analysis. Applied Linguistics. 11(2), pp. 183-199.
Dornyei, Z. (2003) Attitudes, Orientations and Motivations in Language Learning: Advances
in Theory, Research, and Applications. Language Learning, (53, supplement 1): 3–32.
Eckman, F.R. (1994). The competence-performance issue in second-language acquisition
theory: A debate. In E. Tarone, S. Gass and A. Cohen (Eds.), Research methodology
in second language acquisition (pp. 3-15). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Ellis, R. (1985). Understanding second language acquisition. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign
Language Education Press.
Ellis, R. (1990). Instructional second language acquisition. Oxford: Blackwell.
Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign
Language Education Press
Ellis, R. (1995). Modified oral input and the acquisition of word meanings. Applied
Linguistics, 16, 409-433.
Ellis, R. (1999). Learning a second language through interaction. Amsterdam/Philadelphia:
John Benjamins B.V.
Ellis, R., Tanaka, Y., & Yamazaki, A. (1994). Classroom interaction, comprehension, and the
acquisition of L2 word meanings. Language Learning, 44, 449-491.
Ewert, D. E. (2009). L2 writing conferences: Investigating teacher talk. Journal of Second
Language Writing, March 13, 2009.
Ferguson, C. A. (1971). Absence of copula and the notion of simplicity: A study of normal
speech, baby talk, foreigner talk and pidgins. In D. Holmes (Ed.), Pidginization and
creolization of languages (pp.141-150). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ferguson, C. A. (1975). Towards a characterization of English foreigner talk.
Anthropological Linguistics, 17, 1-14.
Flood, J. et. al (2003). (Eds.). Handbook of research on teaching English language arts. (2nd
Ed.). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Gass, S. (1988). Integrating research areas: A framework for second language studies.
Applied Linguistics, 9, 198-217.

93
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

Gass. S., & Varonis, E. (1994). Input, interaction and second language production. Studies in
Second Language Acquisition, 16, 283-302.
Gaies, S. (1977). The nature of linguistic input in formal second language learning. In H. D.
Brown, C. A. Yorio, & R. H. Crymes (Eds.), On TESOL ’77: Classroom-oriented
research in second language acquisition (pp. 204-212). Washington, D.C.: TESOL.
Graddol, D. (2006). English Next: Why global English may mean the end of English as a
Foreign Language. London: British Council.
Glense, (1999). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (2nd ed.). Don
Mills, Ontario, Canada: Longman.
Gregg, K. (1984). Krashen’s monitor and occam’s razor. Applied Linguistics, 5, 79-100.
Griffiths, R. (1990). Speech rate and NNS comprehension: A preliminary study in time-
benefit analysis. Language Learning, 40(3), 311-336.
Hatch, E. (1978). Discourse analysis and second language acquisition: Issues & approaches
(pp. 34-69). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Hatch, E. (1983a). Simplification and second language acquisition. In R. W. Andersen (Ed.),
Pidginization and creolization as language acquisition (pp. 59-86). Rowley, MA:
Newbury House.
Hatch, E. (1983b). Psycholinguistics: A second language perspective. Rowley, MA:
Newbury House.
Henzl, V. M. (1973). Linguistic register of foreign language instruction. Language Learning,
23, pp. 207-227.
Henzl, V. M. (1979). Foreigner talk in the classroom. International Review of Applied
Linguistics - IRAL, 17(2), pp. 159-167.
Johnson, Keith. (2002). An Introduction to foreign language learning and teaching. Beijing:
Foreign Language Teaching and Research .
Krashen, S. D. (1980). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. In J.Alatis (Ed.),
Current issues in bilingual education (pp. 144-158). Washington, D.C.: Georgetown
University Press.
Krashen, S. D. (1981). Second language acquisition and language learning. Oxford:
Pergamon.
Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practices in second language acquisition. Oxford:
Pergamon
Krashen, S. D. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. New York: Longman.

94
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

Krashen, S. D., & Terrell, T. D. (1983). The natural approach: Language acquisition in the
classroom. Oxford: Pergamon.
Harmer, J. (2007). The practice of English language teaching (4th Ed.).Harlow: Pearson
Education.
Hester, S. & Francis, (2001). Institutional talk institutionalised? Text, 20 (3), pp.391-413.

Jacob, George and Farrel, Tom (2003). Understanding and implementing the CLT paradigm,
RELC Journal, 41(1), 5-30
Kataoka, A. (2001). Factors of making an effective “teacher talk” in the Japanese language
class. Journal of Tokyo. Kasei Gakuin University, 40, 181-183.
Krashen, S. D. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. New York: Longman.
Larsen-Freeman, D. & Long, M.H. (1991). An Introduction to Second Language Acquisition
Research. Harlow: Longman.
Lennon, P. (1990) Investigating fluency in EFL: A Qualitative Approach. Language
Learning. 40 (3): 387-417.
Long, M. H. (1980). Input, interaction, and second language acquisition (Unpublished
doctoral dissertation). University of California, Los Angeles.
Long, M. (1981). Input, interaction, and second language acquisition. In H. Winitz (Ed.),
Native language and foreign language acquisition. Vol. 379 (pp.259-278). New York:
Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.
Long, M. (1982). Native speaker/non-native speaker conversation in the second language
classroom. In M. Long & C. Richards (Eds.), Methodology in TESOL: A book of
readings (pp. 339-354). New York: Newbury House.
Long, M. (1983). Native speaker/non-native speaker conversation and the negotiation of
comprehensible input. Applied Linguistics, 4, 126-141.
Long, M. (1985). Input and second language acquisition theory. In S. M. Gass & C. Madden
(Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 377-393). Rowley, MA: Newbury
House.
Long, M. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In
W. C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp.
413-468). New York: Academic Press.
Long, M., & Sato, C. (1983). Classroom foreigner talk discourse: Forms and functions of
teachers’ questions. In S. W. Seliger & M. Long (Eds.), Classroom-oriented research
(pp. 268-285). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

95
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

Long, M. H. (1983). Linguistic and conversational adjustments to non-native speakers.

Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 5(2), 177-193.
Long, M. (1990). The Least a Second Language Theory Needs to Explain. TESOL Quarterly,
24:649-666 reprinted in Brown, H.D. & Gonzo, S (1995). Readings on Second
Language Acquisition. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Regents.
Loschky, L. (1994). Comprehensible input and second language acquisition: What is the
relationship? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, 303-323.
Lucas, S. E. (2006). The art of public speaking. (10th Ed.). Singapore: McGraw-Hill.
Mackey, A., & Gass, S. M. (2005). Second language research: Methodology and design.
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Matsumoto, H. (2006b). Triangulated studies on teacher talk and student comprehension in
Japanese (as a second/foreign) language classrooms at American colleges and
universities. Journal of Japanese Language Education Methods, 13(1), 28-29.
Mehan, H. (1979). "What time is it, Denise?": asking known information questions in
classroom discourse. Theory into Practice 18, 4, October.
McLaughlin, B. (1987). The monitor model: Some methodological considerations. Language
Learning, 28, 309-332.
McHoul, A. (1978). The organisation of turns at formal talk in the classroom. Language in
Society, (7), 183-213.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded source
book (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Nunan, David. (1991). Language teaching methodology: A textbook for teachers. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press
Osborn, S., Osborn, M., & Osborn, R. (2008). Public speaking guidebook. Boston: Pearson.
Oh, S. Y. (2001). Two types of input modification and EFL reading comprehension:
Simplification versus elaboration. TESOL Quarterly, 35, 69-97.
Parker, K., & Chaudron, C. (1987). The effects of linguistic simplifications and elaborative
modifications on L2 comprehension. University of Hawaii Working Papers in ESL, 6,
107-133.
Pica, T., Young, R., & Doughty, C. (1987). The impact of interaction on comprehension. TESOL
Quarterly, 21, 737-759.
Pica, T. (1994). Research on negotiation: What does it reveal about second-language learning
conditions, processes, and outcomes? Language Learning, 44, 493-527.

96
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

Richards, J. C (2006). Communicative language teaching today. New York: Cambridge

University Press.
Richards, J. (1990). Beyond training: Approaches to teacher education in language teaching.
Language Teacher, 14, 3-8.
Richards, J. C. 1992. Longman Dictionary of Language teaching & Applied linguistics.
Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Richards, J. C., & Lockhard, C. (1994 ). Reflective Teaching. New York: Cambridge University
Press.
Sinclair, J. M. and Coulthard, R. M. (1975). Towards an analysis of discourse: The English
used by teachers and pupils. Oxford: OUP.
Snow, C. E. (1972). Mothers' speech to children learning language. Child Development, 43
(2), 549-565.
Snow, C. E. (1994). Beginning from baby talk: Twenty years of research on input and
interaction. In C. Gallaway, & B. J. Richards (Eds.), Input and interaction in
language acquisition (pp. 3-12). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Snow, C., & Ferguson, C. (1977). Talking to children: Language input and acquisition.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Stern, H.H. 1983. Fundamental concepts of language teaching. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign
Language Education Press.
Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and
comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in
second language acquisition (pp. 235-252). Rowley, MA: Newbury House
Tauroza S. & D. Allison (1990) Speech rates in British English. Applied Linguistics, 11(1).

Tollefson, J. W. (1988). Measuring communication in ESL/EFL classes. Cross Currents,

15(1), 37-46.
Ur, P. (1996). A Course in Language Teaching: Practice & Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Van Lier, L. 1988. The classroom and the language learner. London: Longman.

Walsh, S. (2002). Construction or obstruction: Teacher talk and learner involvement in the
EFL classroom. Language Teaching Research, 6(1), 3-23.
Wesche, M. B., & Ready, D. (1985). Foreigner talk in the university classroom. Students’
Perception 74 Arizona Working Papers in SLAT - Vol. 17. In S. M. Gass, & C. G.

97
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 89-114). Cambridge, MA:
Newbury House.
White, L (1987). Against comprehensible input: The Input Hypothesis and the development
of L2 competence. Applied linguistics, 8, 95-110.
Wheldall, K. & F. Merrett. 1984. Positive Teaching: The Behavioral Approach. London:
Allen and Unwin.
Wilson, T., J.M.Wiemann, & D.H.Zimmerman (1984). Models of turn-taking. JLSP (3), 159
83.
Williamson, Graham (2009). Type-Token Ratio. Retrieved on 30.04.2012 from
http://www.speech-therapy-information-and-resources.com/type-token-ratio.html.
Xuewen, Hu (2006). Teacher Talk in EFL in University classrooms. Dissertation submitted
as a partial fulfillment for the degree of M.A. in English Language and Literature.
Chongqing Normal University and Yangtze Normal University, China.
Zhu Hong-qiang. (2004). Relevance Theory and Student-Centered Foreign Language
Teaching. Journal of Shaoguan Institute .

Appendix A

98
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

Conceptual Framework

Uniqueness of language
learning

Classroom Talk Foreigner Talk

Teacher Talk (TT)

Stage 1}

Stage 2} Function 1 Function 2

Stage 3} Authentic Language (CCL) Formal Features Functional Features

Appendix B

Observation Tables

Observation Table for Teacher 1

Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3

Phonology Clear articulation Clear articulation Clear articulation

99
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

Slow rate of Normal rate of Normal rate of

delivery delivery delivery
Natural frequency Natural frequency Natural frequency
of stressed words of stressed words of stressed words
Less pauses More pauses Natural pauses
between utterances between utterances between utterances
Natural intonation Natural intonation Natural intonation

Morphology and Use of contractions Use of contractions Use of contractions

Semantics as opposed to full as opposed to full as opposed to full
forms forms forms
No use of No use of Use of inflections
inflections inflections
Less infinitive verb Less infinitive verb Less infinitive verb
forms forms forms
Few idiomatic Few idiomatic No idiomatic
expression expression expression
High average High average High average
lexical frequency lexical frequency lexical frequency
of nouns and verbs of nouns and verbs of nouns and verbs
High proportion of High proportion of High proportion of
linking verbs to linking verbs to linking verbs to
total verbs total verbs total verbs
Less use of Use of concrete Use of concrete
concrete verbs verbs over weak verbs over weak
over weak verbs, verbs, like do verbs, like do
like do
Syntax Very short Short sentences Not very short
sentences sentences
More stereotyped More stereotyped More stereotyped
stock expressions- stock expressions- stock expressions-
“yeah” “yeah”, “oh” “yeah”
Few adjectival, Few adjectival, Few adjectival,
adverbial and noun adverbial and noun adverbial and noun
clauses, few clauses, few clauses, few
relative clauses and relative clauses and relative clauses and
appositives appositives appositives
Very few Few subordinate Subordinate clauses
subordinate clauses clauses
Simplified No overt simplified No overt simplified
grammar grammar grammar
Utterances not Well- formed Well- formed
always well- utterances utterances
formed Canonical word More yes/no
More ‘wh’ order questions
questions More yes/no Use of question
Frequent repetition intonation tags
and questioning questions Simplified negation
Simplified negation Repetition and
Frequent repetition restatement

100
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

and restatement

Lexicon Marked use of Marked use of Marked use of

lexical items lexical items lexical items
Lower type-token Lower type-token Lower type-token
ratio ratio ratio
Smaller Vocabulary Smaller Vocabulary Smaller Vocabulary
Use of more Use of more Use of more
generic terms generic terms generic terms
rather than specific rather than specific rather than specific
No complex words No complex words No complex words
Use of foreign Use of foreign Use of foreign
vocabularies vocabularies vocabularies

Observation Table for Teacher 2

Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3

Phonology Clear articulation Clear articulation Clear articulation
Very slow rate of Normal rate of Normal rate of
delivery delivery delivery
More stressed
Natural frequency Natural frequency
words of stressed words of stressed words
More pauses Less pauses
More pauses between utterances between utterances
between utterances
Natural intonation Natural intonation
Natural intonation

Morphology and Less use of Use of contractions Use of contractions

Semantics contractions as as opposed to full as opposed to full
opposed to full forms forms
forms Use of inflections
No use of Use of inflections
inflections Less infinitive verb
Less infinitive verb Less infinitive verb forms
forms forms No idiomatic
Few idiomatic Use of Idiomatic expression
expression expression High average
High average High average lexical frequency
lexical frequency lexical frequency of nouns and verbs
of nouns and verbs of nouns and verbs High proportion of
High proportion of High proportion of linking verbs to
linking verbs to linking verbs to total verbs
total verbs total verbs
Less use of Use of concrete Use of concrete
concrete verbs verbs over weak verbs over weak
over weak verbs, verbs, like do verbs, like do

101
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

like do
Syntax Very short Short sentences Not very short
sentences sentences
More stereotyped More stereotyped Less stereotyped
stock expressions- stock expressions- stock expressions-
“yeah”, “really”, “yeah”, “oh” “yeah”
“oh”
Very few Few adjectival, Few adjectival,
adjectival, adverbial and noun adverbial and noun
adverbial and noun clauses, few clauses, few
clauses, few relative clauses and relative clauses and
relative clauses and appositives appositives
appositives
Very few Few subordinate Subordinate clauses
subordinate clauses clauses
Simplified No overt simplified No overt simplified
grammar grammar grammar
Utterances are Well- formed Well- formed
well- formed utterances utterances
No canonical word No canonical word Use of question
order order tags
More yes/no More yes/no Simplified negation
intonation intonation Repetition and
questions questions restatement
Frequent repetition Simplified negation
and questioning Frequent repetition
and restatement

Lexicon Lower type-token Lower type-token Lower type-token

ratio ratio ratio
Smaller Vocabulary Good Vocabulary Good Vocabulary
Use of more Use of more Use of more
generic terms specific terms specific terms
rather than specific rather than generic rather than generic
No complex words No complex words Few complex
words
Use of foreign Use of foreign
vocabularies vocabularies

Observation Table for Teacher 3

Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3

Phonology Clear articulation Clear articulation Clear articulation
Slow rate of Normal rate of Normal rate of
delivery delivery delivery
Natural frequency Less number of Natural frequency
of stressed words stressed words of stressed words

102
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

More pauses More pauses Less pauses

between utterances between utterances between utterances
Natural intonation Natural intonation Natural intonation

Morphology and Use of contractions Use of contractions Use of contractions

Semantics as opposed to full as opposed to full as opposed to full
forms forms forms
No use of Use of inflections Use of inflections
inflections
Less infinitive verb Less infinitive verb Less infinitive verb
forms forms forms
No idiomatic Few idiomatic Few idiomatic
expression expression expression
High average High average High average
lexical frequency lexical frequency lexical frequency
of nouns and verbs of nouns and verbs of nouns and verbs
High proportion of High proportion of High proportion of
linking verbs to linking verbs to linking verbs to
total verbs total verbs total verbs
Less use of Use of concrete Use of concrete
concrete verbs verbs over weak verbs over weak
over weak verbs, verbs, like do verbs, like do
like do
Syntax Short sentences Not very short Not very short
sentences sentences
Less stereotyped Less stereotyped Less stereotyped
stock expressions stock expressions stock expressions
Few adjectival, Few adjectival, Few adjectival,
adverbial and noun adverbial and noun adverbial and noun
clauses, few clauses, few clauses, few
relative clauses and relative clauses and relative clauses and
appositives appositives appositives

Very few Few subordinate Subordinate clauses

subordinate clauses clauses
No overt simplified No overt simplified No overt simplified
grammar grammar grammar
Utterances not Well- formed Well- formed
always well- utterances utterances
formed
Canonical word Canonical word Canonical word
order not followed order not followed order not followed

More ‘wh’ More ‘wh’ More ‘wh’

questions questions questions
Frequent repetition Simplified negation Use of question
and questioning Very frequent tags
repetition and Simplified negation
restatement Repetition and

103
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

restatement

Lexicon Marked use of Marked use of Marked use of

lexical items lexical items lexical items
Lower type-token Lower type-token Lower type-token
ratio ratio ratio
Smaller Vocabulary Smaller Vocabulary Smaller Vocabulary
Use of more Use of more Use of more
generic terms generic terms generic terms
rather than specific rather than specific rather than specific
No complex words No complex words No complex words

Observation Table for Teacher 4

Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3

Phonology Clear articulation Clear articulation Clear articulation
Slow rate of Normal rate of Normal rate of
delivery delivery delivery
Natural frequency Natural frequency Natural frequency
of stressed words of stressed words of stressed words
More pauses Less pauses Less pauses
between utterances between utterances between utterances
Natural intonation Natural intonation Natural intonation

Morphology and Use of full forms Use of contractions Use of contractions

Semantics as opposed to as opposed to full as opposed to full
contractions forms forms
No use of No use of Use of inflections
inflections inflections
Less infinitive verb Less infinitive verb Less infinitive verb
forms forms forms
No idiomatic Few idiomatic Few idiomatic
expression expression expression
High average High average High average
lexical frequency lexical frequency lexical frequency
of nouns and verbs of nouns and verbs of nouns and verbs
High proportion of High proportion of High proportion of
linking verbs to linking verbs to linking verbs to
total verbs total verbs total verbs
Less use of Use of concrete Use of concrete
concrete verbs verbs over weak verbs over weak
over weak verbs, verbs, like do verbs, like do
like do
Syntax Short sentences Not very short Not very short
sentences sentences
Less stereotyped Less stereotyped Less stereotyped
stock expressions stock expressions stock expressions

104
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

Few adjectival, Few adjectival, Few adjectival,

adverbial and noun adverbial and noun adverbial and noun
clauses, few clauses, few clauses, few
relative clauses and relative clauses and relative clauses and
appositives appositives appositives

Very few Few subordinate Subordinate clauses

subordinate clauses clauses
No overt simplified No overt simplified No overt simplified
grammar grammar grammar
Utterances not Well- formed Well- formed
always well- utterances utterances
formed Canonical word
order
More ‘wh’ More yes/no More yes/no
questions intonation questions
questions Use of question
Frequent repetition Simplified negation tags
and questioning Very frequent Simplified negation
repetition and Repetition and
restatement restatement

Lexicon Marked use of Marked use of Marked use of

lexical items lexical items lexical items
Lower type-token Lower type-token Lower type-token
ratio ratio ratio
Smaller Vocabulary Smaller Vocabulary Smaller Vocabulary
Use of more Use of more Use of more
generic terms generic terms generic terms
rather than specific rather than specific rather than specific
No complex words No complex words No complex words

Appendix C
Participating Teacher Follow-up Questionnaire
Please respond to the following items:

1. Do you think that students learn best from a teacher who uses “special” language
(with a lot of repetitions, for example) or when they are exposed to “authentic”
language?

105
LINGUISTIC ADJUSTMENTS IN TEACHER TALK

2. In planning an educational activity, can you tell me what attention do you pay to the
language you are going to use during the lesson with your students?
3. Do you adjust your language to the level of students? If so, can you describe the
linguistic adjustments you make?
4. Can you explain what linguistic means you think are best if a teacher wants to achieve
clarity with material being used in a lesson?

106