Chapter 4: Categorization of data analysis

4.1 Introduction

This chapter carried out the categorization of data analysis based on the methodological and

theoretical framework established to investigate teachers’ communication strategies. The chapter

discusses the identification processes, reported in the following sections of categories 4.3. The

exemplification and description regarding macro and micro-categorization of the study are given

in 4.3.1 and 2 part of the chapter. Section 4.4 gives a summary and conclude the chapter.

4.2 Processes in the identification of categories

The categorization of data analysis carried out on three steps. In step one, the data was transcribed

and further these transcriptions were divided into utterances. In step 2, the segmented data was

carefully analyzed to find out how the interlocutors develop mutual understanding in achieving

pedagogic purposes taking place in classroom discourse. The main purpose was to find out the

point where the teacher adjusted his message in the targeted communication. The aim was to

identify the discourse and linguistic means used as instruments to adjust the message in the

communication.

The main findings revealed was that both the interlocutors focused two processes during

communication; lexical compensation was used to focus on the lexical item and meaning

negotiation was used to communicate the message. Due to some variations in their focus, both the

interlocutors; the students and teachers shared some aspects as hearer-orientated because they had

in mind limited proficiency of the students during the production and comprehension stage. The
1
teachers used some devices to adjust their message that occurred due to limited proficiency of the

students and the students featured the problem that indicated the teacher to adapt facilitating the

discourse. The teacher adapted these modification devices such as; clarification requests,

comprehension checks, confirmation checks, recasts, and repeats. Students opted for using lexical

compensation strategies such as; paraphrase and descriptions.

In the third step, the developed categories were checked in order to examine the function they

perform in different classes by different teachers. In this stage, the identified categories used by

the teachers were labeled and presented in the current study based on the categorization reviewed

in the literature.

4.3 Categorization system

The macro and micro-classification of communication strategies are reported in this section. A

distinction is made between the meaning negotiation strategies and lexical compensatory strategies

based on macro-level. A further distinction is made in lexical compensatory strategies to

differentiate first in language transfer, circumlocution and them the non-linguistic devices. The

macro and micro level categories are defined and exemplified from the collected data. The

exemplifications contained excerpts from the collected data and supported with comments to

demonstrate the pedagogic role and contextual importance of the communication strategies.

4.3.1 Meaning negotiation strategies

4.3.1.1 self-reformulation

4.3.1.2 Other-reformulation
2
4.3.1.3 Other repetition

4.3.1.4 Turn completion

4.3.1.5 Cueing

4.3.1.6 Confirmation check

4.3.1.7 Comprehension check

4.3.1.8 Clarification request

4.3.2 Lexical compensatory strategies [Explication]

4.3.2.1 Circumlocution

A. Paraphrase

a) Description

b) Contextualized description

B. Approximation

4.3.2.2 Language transfer

A. Code-switching

4.3.2.3 Non-linguistic strategies

A. Mime

B. Appeal to authority

3
4.3.3 Macro-level categorization

Communication strategies are linguistic devices used by the interlocutors in the discourse to bridge

the gap and reach a mutual understanding. The current study focuses the teachers' communication

strategies in the ESL/EFL classroom where the target language performs the double role as; source

of communication and the ultimate target of the pedagogic purpose. In this regard, keeping in view

the definition of communication strategies, CSs has dual roles in the mechanism of the discourse

such as to make the adjustment between the students and teachers and to provide an alternative

source for compensating lexical gap between them. Due to this the distinction criterion has divided

communication strategies into two main types such as meaning negotiation and lexical

compensation strategies.

The second significant aspect of communication strategies as defined is; the backbone in meaning

communication and plays a vital role in targeting pedagogic purposes. It adds multi-functionality

to the meaning negotiation regarding the identification and analysis of strategies in classroom

discourse. Students and teachers both require discoursal and linguistic modifications to adjust their

message because either of the interlocutors can face a problem in communicating the intended

concept. Teachers' communication strategies are primarily concerned with the students'

communication disparities in discourse while at occasions it deals with his own message in

communicating a particular concept that requires a lexical item. Macro-level categorization of

communication strategies is defined as;

‘Meaning negotiation strategies’ are discoursal devices used by the interlocutor to elicit utterances

to check the production or the comprehension of the preceding or incoming utterance of the listener

or speaker.
4
These type of communication strategies are the adjustment on the part of the teachers in discourse.

These strategies are also known as supra-sentential categories based on their orientation, either

focusing the previous or following utterances or targeting meaning negotiation. The former refers

to the speaker who completes or restates the preceding interlocutor’ utterance or reformulating his

own message. The second type refers to the meaning negotiation used to check or seek clarification

of the meaning by the previous speaker to check the comprehension of the present speaker.

Meaning negotiation has a substantial role in the clarification of the meaning in discourse. By

implying theses type of communication strategies, they can function to initiate clarification

sequences or repair Schegloff et al. (1977). By facilitating the interlocutor to produce the next turn

is achievable through clarification sequences and to bring the intended meaning of the former

speaker closer is enhanced by repair. The following example demonstrates how in line 3 the

question of the teacher orient the problem of the students to deal with his own message.

Example 4.1 (T5-L3)

T: 1 how old is he?

S: 2 as old as same I

T: 3 as old as you?

S: 4 Yes, sir

Teacher's use of communication strategy in line 3 alter the discourse because the next turn is

suspended due to communication problem faced by the student. Here the strategy performs a dual

function as it helps in the comprehension of the message as well as provide the target lexical item

to convey the intended meaning.

In the following example, ‘self-reformulation' as a meaning negotiation strategy is used by the

teacher to simplify his initiation and help the students to achieve the comprehension.
5
Example 4.2 [T4-L3]

T: 1 did you take the necessary ones?

2 did you check the necessary items?

3 The items that are mandatory.

S: 4 hmmm, Yes, I did.

T: 5 I will see it later on

In line 2 and 3, the teacher uses communication strategy of self-reformation to negotiate the

meaning. The student is unable to respond until the teacher reformulates the message and the

students reached a mutual agreement. The teacher also used some lexical substitutions such as

mandatory, necessary, take, check, items and ones to simplify his message that the students could

comprehend the intended concept before giving their responses to the teacher.

The second types of macro categories concerning communication strategies are lexical

compensation strategies. Lexical compensation strategies are defined as the substitution or

supplementing the ‘meaning structure' due to limited proficiency of the interlocutors. These are

form-meaning structures used alternatively to compensate for the students' linguistic lexical gap

perceived by the teacher in his assessment or acknowledge by both of them due to the performance

of the student in a discourse. It can be used prospectively to deal with problems in concepts and

retrospectively to provide a lexical item indicated by the interlocutor.

The difference between meaning negotiation and lexical compensatory strategy is drawn based on

their focus and function. Meaning negotiation strategy refers to the discourse moves that change

the structure of the discourse by initiating move during problems occurrence when it threatens the

message in discourse. These are discourse detours used by both the interlocutors to sustain the

conversation during the problem phase in production or comprehension. In contrary, lexical

6
compensatory strategies refer to the alternative lexical entities used during the problematic phase

in the interaction that occur due to a lexical gap and disrupts the message in production or

comprehension stage. The students imply these strategies as stopgaps, avoid, abandon, and

achieve the message or appeal for assistance. The teachers incorporate these strategies to assist the

learners in their lexical gap or situations when they themselves want to make adjustment due to

the limited proficiency of them. The teachers use these strategies to supplement or substitute the

target item in unmarked form to avoid the digression from the message in interaction or a marked

form in setting where the compensated form originate some exchanges of utterances to develop a

connection between the form and meaning. The illustration is given below to demonstrate the

unmarked form of lexical compensatory strategy.

Example 4.3 [T5 L3]

T: 1 gift is necessary

2 What about other things

S: 3 souvenirs also

T: 4 souvenirs

5 Yes, you mean presents

6 Any other thing that comes to your mind?

In line 5 the teacher’s use of lexical compensatory strategy demonstrates the agreement in which

the teacher agrees to the response of the student. The teacher complement to the repetitive response

of the students, it is a prospective strategy in which the teacher initiates the move through his

assessment of the lexical deficiency of the students without explicit indication.

7
In the following example in line 5 to 9, the teacher uses lexical meaning description through a

marked form in a contextualized description as a retrospective measure to compensate a lexical

item due to the problem faced by the student in the previous utterance.

Example 4.4 [T1 L1]

S: 1 March is the name of a month

T: 2 Yes, it is the name of the month and starts with a capital letter.

S: 3 walking together

T: 4 Oh yes, which is a march

5 When people do not like something. Right.

6 or they demand something from the government

7 They go out for a protest.

8 It means when people march, they walk together, right?

9 They hold banners and posters in their hands, got it.

10 March is a demonstration

The students signaled the teacher in line 1 and 3 concerning the meaning of March. The teacher

provides an extended definition in a contextualized way to make it more clear and understandable.

In broader perspectives, a distinction is made between lexical compensatory categories such as

‘non-linguistic strategies’, ‘language transfer’ and ‘circumlocution’ Tarone (1977) and Faerch &

Kasper (1983). The interlocutors opt to solve the communication problem by using L2 or switch

to L1 or L3. Sometimes they use non-linguistic devices such as gesticulations or visual images. If

none of the devices available consequently the interlocutors tend to use bilingual or monolingual

dictionaries.

4.3.4 Micro-categories
8
4.3.4.1 Meaning negotiation strategies

As defined the function of meaning negotiation strategies is to develop mutual understanding by

the use of interactional devices in communication. It has two main functions in interaction as:

a) Dealing with the problems in students’ communication that occurs due to hearing or

understanding in the current or previous utterance.

b) Secondly, the teachers try to deal with the problems of the students by way of conveying

his intended message. This type of strategy takes place mostly due to the teachers own

problems to communicate and comprehend the students' responses in a target like a form.

Further categorization of the meaning negotiation strategies emphasizing on the role either it

focuses on the previous utterances or concentrating on meaning negotiation. The former includes

‘turn-completion', ‘self-or other-reformulation', by these ways the teacher assists the students in

the production and comprehension of the messages. The latter refers to the use of devices as ‘cues’,

‘clarification requests’, ‘comprehension checks’, and ‘confirmation checks’, the teachers

implicitly assist the students in order to manage their problems by themselves in the production

and comprehension of the utterances.

a) Self-reformulation

Teacher initiates a move by using a certain modification of his preceding utterance to enhance the

processing time for the students and simplify the input. The reformulation of the teachers’

utterance include the change in the structure of the question or bring change in the type of questions

such from open to close-ended. Teachers' reformulation consists of a surface change in syntactic

structure or lexical substitutions. Change is primarily focusing on in the utterance rather than the
9
function of the utterances. Teachers' ‘self-reformulation' is differentiated from ‘re-structuring’ and

‘self-repair’. In ‘self-repair’ the teacher abandons the message in midway and repair the abandoned

item or whole utterance. ‘Self-reformulation' is audience-centered because it helps in assisting the

hearers while the repair is speaker centered because it deals with the linguistic proficiency of the

speaker in utterances. The following illustration in line 6 demonstrates the extension of the

preceding question of the teacher.

Example 4.5 [T1 L1]

T: 1 alright, he became

2 he became what?

S: 3 he has become something in a mosque

T: 4 okay, well. What do we call that?

6 what do we call that if someone is a religious person?

The extension of the teacher on the prior statements assist the students in providing relevant

information. Although, it seems to be repetition but repetition provide help in comprehension and

compensate them due to their little proficiency in the target language.

b) other-reformulation

Other-reformulation refers to the teacher initiation in which he restates, expands or summarizes

the utterances of the students in the preceding statements. Other-reformulation includes three types

of modifications such as repetition by way of using lexical substitution, re-structuring the utterance

either use lexical substitution or without it and summarizing or expanding the utterance in order to

communicate the message from a different angle.

10
Teachers use other-reformulation when there is ambiguity in the message or inappropriate use of

lexical items by the students that lead to a faulty comprehension. The students' utterances include

problems such as false starts, repeats, pauses, and circumlocution with a lengthy description which

could be communicated in a short expression. Therefore, the teacher uses the CSs of other-

reformulation to formulate the message in a more refined way. Sometimes, the students reduce

their utterance to short form to avoid problems in the formulation phase of their message. In this

regard, the teacher re-formulate the message by expanding to incorporate the appropriate

information left out by the student. Different types and functions of other-reformulation by the

teacher in classroom discourse reveal the responsible position of the teacher. Other-reformulation

plays a vital role in classroom discourse due to its multi-dimensional approach in the input of L2.

The following example reveals the use of other-reformulation by the teacher.

Example: 4.6 [T1 L1]

T: 1 why do we run from dogs?

S: 2 because the dogs [+ + +]

T: 3 Yes, because of what?

S: 4 the dogs catch

T: 5 the dogs bite

S: 6 Yes, yes they bite

The teacher uses the communication strategy of other-reformulation in line 5 in response to the

student’s inappropriate target item in the preceding utterance. The student and teacher reached a

mutual agreement by re-formulating the intended message.

11
c) Other-repetition

Other-repetition is defined as the complete or partial repetition of the students' utterances by the

teacher. Other-repetition has dual functions in classroom interaction. The first, one is the use of

falling intonation that indicates the continuation and confirmation of the previous utterance by the

students. The second is low-key rising intonation that indicates the problem in the utterance of the

students and needs repair before the second move initiate. The former strategies include the use

of modality particles such as ‘oh', ‘well', ‘no', and ‘yes'. The use of these devices inform the

students how the teacher perceives the previous utterance. By the use of these devices,

clarification, and comments take place often succeed by repetitions. The following illustration in

line 3 shows the use of partial repetition by the teacher to specify the information required for the

clarification.

Example 4.7 [T4 L3]

S: 1 Karachi also

2 That time I was eight years old

T: 3 eight

4 could you remember more of that visit?

d) Turn completion

Turn completion is defined as teacher move to provide utterance because the students have

appealed implicitly or explicitly or can be due to the hesitation phenomena or long pauses in

students interaction. Turn completion and other-reformulation are overlapping because both are

12
used in a situation where the students need assistance. The difference is that in turn completion the

student appeal for assistance or fail to provide the expression while in other-reformulation the

students come up with some expression in non-target form and the teacher has to provide the

intended meaning in a target form. The following example clarifies turn completion when the

student cannot retrieve his memory.

Example 4.8 [T1 L1]

T: 1 what exercise?

2 what happened there?

3 what is that?

S: 4 there were same grammar exercises

5 I can’t remember

T: 6 Model auxiliaries

7 Oka, right and what happened after that

S: 8 hmm, we started tenses

The student in line 5 signals that he cannot retrieve the information. He uses indirect appeal for

assistance, and the teacher in the succeeding line 6 provide the missing information.

e) Cueing

Cues refer to the teacher's move that links the earlier initiation and prompt the students to modify

or give a signal to the previous response. The teachers use cues when the students' fail to provide

the response or provide a partial message that depends on the next move. Cue is different from

self-reformulation because self-reformulation help the students in comprehension while cue

13
function to simplify the message in order to indicate the students find the appropriate choice. The

following example is a cue by the teacher.

Example 4. 9[T10 L3]

T: 1 okay, can you share your new words with me?

2 Your new added words to the list.

S: 3 we need more time

T: 4 Okay, read it one more time.

S: 5 some CDs are forbidden

T; 6 Yes, CDs with illegal content are forbidden by law.

The teachers use the cue in line 3 because the students cannot retrieve the information and ask for

more time. The teacher cues in line 4 to go back to the added items and in the next initiation in line

5 the student come up with the exact information.

f) Confirmation checks

Long (1980) defines confirmation checks as any move designed by the speaker in order to check

the understanding or hearing of the previous utterance. Confirmation checks include partial or fully

repetition of the previous speaker utterances. Confirmation checks are questions that intend to

check the code or content by way of accepting or rejecting the previous information. Code-oriented

confirmation includes repetition or reformulation with rising intonation of a whole or part of the

previous utterance while content-based confirmation offer the information expected from the

previous interlocutor about the content. In content-based confirmation, the learners are assisted by

simplifying the input that hinders the comprehension due to their limited proficiency of L2.

Confirmation checks are of greater help in the classroom setting because the teacher dissects the

14
required information and provide them in a manageable way to be appropriately processed. The

following example demonstrates the use of form-oriented confirmation check by the teacher.

Example 4. 10[T5 L3]

S: 1 one need to be 18 for learning the driving

2 and you need passing the test and exam

3 you also need to know the law for practicing

T: 4 traffic rules for driving

5 Yes, rules of the traffic.

The above confirmation check in line 4 is a form-oriented check. Form-oriented confirmation and

reformulation both have the function to reformulate the utterances of the students in a target like a

form. The form-oriented is used when the teacher is in doubt and want the confirmation from the

student but in reformulation, the teacher presents the form in a target like way.

The following example demonstrates content-oriented confirmation check focusing on the

information concerning the topic.

Example 4.11[T5 L3]

T: 1 you remained absent yesterday, okay?

S: 2 yes, absent

T: 3 Why were you absent?

S: 4 Accident

T: 5 did you had an accident?

S: 6 Yes, we

T: 7 you were hit by a car? Or

S: 8 I was there in our car

15
T: 9 the other car hit you or you hit that car?

S: 10 we both hit and had accident

In above example line 5, 7 and 9 the teacher uses content-oriented confirmation check because the

students cannot convey the information what the teacher wants to elicit by this way the teacher is

simplifying the communication and focusing on the content to keep the conversation continue.

Sometimes content-oriented confirmation checks occur by a tag question or statement in order to

obtain confirmation or elicit a positive response from the students. These kinds of elicitation

devices provide choices to the students in classroom communication even if the teachers presents

his own views about the content. The following example demonstrates the use of content-oriented

confirmation in which the students are coming from England, and he would need currency in

Pakistan. The teacher gives suggestion in line 5 and needs the agreement. He succeeds in achieving

it in the following line.

Example 4.12 [T4 L3]

S: 1 they do not have Pakistani Rupees in England

T: 2 No, they have Pakistani Rupees in England

3 the point is, he is coming to Pakistan

4 he can convert the currency on his arrival in the airport to Pakistani Rupees

5 would you recommend him to convert it there in England?

S: 7 no

g) Clarification requests

Long (1983) defines clarification requests as any move that includes statement, imperatives or

questions in order to clarify the preceding utterances of the speaker. Keeping in view the focus of

16
the current study, clarification requests are used by the teachers to clarify the previous utterances

of the students, offer new information or present the required information in a target form.

Clarification requests are extensive in scope because it entails new information that requires for

appropriately conveying the message. Clarification requests are different from confirmation check

because clarification requests carry open-ended queries that provided more choices to the students.

The students find the opportunities to share more information in clarification requests due to the

nature of its orientation in discourse. The following example shows the use of clarification request

in line 2 by the teacher for the word ‘fellow’.

Example 4.13 [T11 L3]

S: 1 my fellows

T: 2 what do you mean by fellows?

S: 3 friends in school and [+ + +]

T: 4 Okay, yes

In the above-given example, the teacher uses clarification requests in order to elicit the required

information to reach a mutual understanding. The student communicates the intended message and

both the interlocutors agreed.

In the following example is a content-oriented clarification request used by the teacher in which

more information is required to establish a mutual agreement.

Example 4.14 [T12 L3]

S: 1 questions and answers

2 problems are there

3 when we go on the road they stop us on check posts and ask for the documents

T: 4 what kind of document?

17
S: 5 like your picture, ID card and some other

In line 3 the student introduces a word that creates doubt, in response the teacher uses clarification

requests in line 4 to elicit new information required for clarification. The student provides new

information in the following responses and removes the ambiguities.

Sometimes the teacher uses a display question to clarify the meaning of the previous utterance to

the pedagogic nature of the interaction. Due to the choice of some vocabulary items the teachers

need to ask the students to clarify their previous information and check their knowledge. It

performs dual functions one is providing new lexical item and secondly, helps in communication

to clarify the ambiguity. The following example in line 3 demonstrates a display question used by

the teacher to elicit the meaning of the target concept.

Example 4. 15 [T12 L3]

S: 1 entertainment laughing program

T: 2 entertainment and laugh in a program

3 what do we call this program with a laugh?

4 how do you define it?

S: 5 comedy entertainment

T: 6 yes, it is a comedy show or comedy program

In line 5 the student response to the question of the teacher in line 3 refers to the kind of show that

takes place, but still, the meaning description is required. In this regard, the teacher in line 6 again

recast the refined version in which the meaning is clarified by appropriate target words.

h) Comprehension checks

18
Comprehension checks are defined as moves by the teachers in order to check the utterances of

the students. Comprehension checks include questions as ‘okay', ‘do you understand' etc. The

following example displays the use of a confirmation check in which the teacher asks the students

to provide information that they use in the next turn.

Example 4. 16 [T12 L3]

T: 1 what word you need to use in the three?

2 what word we will use out of these three?

S: 3 Should

T: 4 yes, should

5 we use should for recommendations

6 we will use should or should not

In line 2 in the above example, the teacher uses comprehension checks in order to confirm that the

students are going to use this word in the next turn. The students' response in line 3 confirms the

answer of the teacher that they understand what the teacher wants them to proceed with.

The following illustration exemplifies comprehension checks in pronunciation. This kind of

strategy used by the teacher to check the hearing and understanding of the students.

Example 4. 17 [T6 L2]

T: 1 do you understand how we pronounce it?

S: 2 Yes

T: 3 it is about dirty clothes

S: 4 how is it said dirty?

T: 5 we pronounce it as dir-ty. It is used for something not clean.

19
In line 1 the teacher uses a comprehension check to make sure that the students understand the

right pronunciation of the word ‘dirty'. In the following line, the students repeat the word and want

the teacher to recast it in a target form. The teacher further confirms the word by exemplification

and pronouncing it in a contextual situation.

As mentioned earlier that sub-categories of meaning negotiation perform multi-functionality in

classroom discourse. Particularly concerning the use of other-reformulation in relation to

comprehension checks. We cannot deny that fact of repair in classroom discourse in reference to

‘conversational analytic perspectives’ and repair that occur in the use of communication strategies.

The distinction is drawn between these two types of repair, Van Lier (1988) argues that repair

entails hearing and understanding as well as ‘error replacement’. The focus of the current study in

communication strategies deals with meaning negotiation by way of interaction in effect to reach

a mutual agreement.

The use of other-reformulation in discourse is more inclusive than the term ‘other-repair’ and

therefore the former is preferred over the later that it deals with the utterances of the students for

other purposes.

The use of self or other-repair primarily depends on the context and the meaning requirement to

use a particular type by the teacher. For instance, the use of ‘other reformulation' implies by the

teacher to initiate and execute the repair on the utterances of the students in the same turn while in

clarification requests and confirmation checks the teacher initiate and the students complete the

repair in their next turn. The distinction is made between ‘confirmation checks' and ‘other-

reformulation' as in confirmation check the teacher gives choices to repair while in other-

reformulation the teacher repairs the expression in a didactic manner and does not give any

20
opportunity to the students. In the confirmation check, the teacher adapts the role in which the

students have the choice to agree, disagree, accept or reject the interpretation. Therefore other-

reformulation possess the features of a discourse in which the role of the students and teacher is

more didactic and this represents the classroom interaction rather than naturalistic views.

In the following section, the sub-categories concerning lexical compensatory strategies are

discussed with excerpts from the data to exemplify their context by the teachers in their use of

communication strategies.

4.3 4.2 Lexical compensatory strategies

The micro-level lexical compensatory strategies focus on the lexical gap in the utterances of the

students to assist in the comprehension. It is important to mention that these strategies are used by

teachers as alternatives devices for expression. They take place within interactive moves of the

interlocutors, but they are not interactive moves in their purposes.

4.3.4.2.1 Circumlocution

Bialystok (1983) argues that circumlocution entails a lengthy description of the indented message.

Paribakht (1985) claims that using both these categories as ‘description' and ‘circumlocution' are

more effective than dissecting them into different categories. The use of approximation and

description has the same role in communication. In both situations, the speakers use a target

concept by using alternative means of expression through lengthy description or a single lexical

item. Nijmegen group Kellerman & Bialystok (1997) and Poulisse (1990) state that approximation

and description are the actual realizations of ‘holistic' and ‘analytic' mental processes with similar

function. These both are the macro-categories in the conceptualization process in communication.
21
Circumlocution is an umbrella term that entails both ‘paraphrase’ and lengthy description’ in

which the alternative lexemes express the concept as ‘approximation’.

A. Paraphrase

A paraphrase is a communication strategy that includes a description. The term paraphrase refers

to make a distinction between ‘contextualized' description and ‘description'. The paraphrase is a

pedagogical term used by the teachers in classroom discourse setting in which the students are

facilitated by description.

a) Description

The description is defined as the use of certain features of the target action or object using items

on the supposition that the hearer and speaker understand. The use of description includes

complement for clarification of the target concept or use substitute words that have the

characteristics to refer to the intended object in a discourse. The use of description varies based on

its context such as dictionary definitions that abstract generic meaning of the terms associated with

semantics in linguistics. The following example shows the use of the generic description as a

strategy by the teacher in which he describes the disease.

Example 4. 18 [T8 L1]

S: 1 some are diseases that change

T: 2 Yes, sometimes you get it

3 they are viral diseases

4 they occur due to change in weather

5 they are contagious in nature because they transfer from one person to another

22
In the above example in line 5 the teachers use the description as a linguistic strategy in response

to the students talk in line 1 in which the lexical items need more description and the teacher

provide in the following lines. The teacher uses some characteristics of the viral diseases in order

to comprehend the concept in appropriate lexical words.

b) Contextualized description

The contextualized description refers to the lexical items used by the speaker in reference to the

context. The speaker makes the association between the referent and the lexical items that describe

the object in a particular context. The following illustration exemplifies the use of contextualized

description by the teacher.

Example 4.19 [T10 L2]

S: 1 Hero...

T: 2 Yes, a true hero

3 a person who is different from other people with some characteristics

4 famous for brave deeds, who help people in different situations

5 heroes were people who won the wars in difficult situations and were praised

6 Malala Yousafzai is the hero for our country

The contextualized description of the word in line 5 and 6 extend the literal definition and visualize

the word by referring to different contexts. These visual descriptions create a clear picture in the

mind of the students in understanding a particular object or concept.

B. Approximation

23
The approximation is defined as using a substitute lexical item by the speaker in order to exploit

the association between the target object and appropriate word. The association is established by

using different means such as ‘hyponymy/hypernymy’, ‘metonymy’, ‘antonyms’ and ‘synonymy’.

‘hyponymy/hypernymy' refers to the use of a more general superordinate term. ‘Metonymy' is the

use of lexical items that share more common characteristics of the intended object and can express

the idea more easily. ‘antonyms' and ‘synonymy' refer to the use of lexical items either denote a

similar meaning of the target concept or opposite to make the hearer recover the target concept

easily. The purpose of all these lexical substitutions vary by way of formality, informality,

specificity, generality and convey partial or all association of the target object. The following

example demonstrates the use of antonym.

Example 4. 20 [T3 L1]

S: 1 Bright color

T: 2 Yes, it is not dark

3 It is more shining and the opposite of dark

In line 3 the above example the teacher uses antonym dark for the opposite of bright to denote a

link between the intended concept and the lexical item.

The following example illustrates the use of synonyms for minutes. The students mentioned the

word minute referring to time, and in response, the teacher uses a more appropriate word in line 3

to convey the target concept through the more accurate word that denote similar meaning only

substitute the lexical item.

Example 4.21 [T1 L1]

S: 1 I need more minutes

24
T: 2 Okay, right

3 You need more time

The following example shows the use of ‘hyponymy/hypernymy' in which the teacher denote more

general terms by referring to the human body.

Example 4.22 [T6 L1]

S: 1 Body

T: 2 okay body is something

3 like feet, arms, eyes, and head

4 it is what we have a human body

In the above example in line 3 the teacher uses ‘hyponymy/hypernymy' denoting superordinate

terms that exploit the link between the intended concept and lexical items to convey the concept

of the human body.

The lexical variations between the two varieties such as American English and British English

sometimes help the teachers in providing a term from one dialect that assists in the identification

of the target concept in the second dialect or variety. These different lexical items are used by

language teachers particularly in ESL/EFL context as approximation and substitutions to assist the

L2 learners in acquiring a particular concept. In the following example, the teacher uses the lexical

substitutions biscuits in line 2 to convey the target concept.

Example 4. 23 [T3 L2]

S: 1 cookies

T: 2 In America people use cookies for biscuits

T: 3 In British English we call them biscuits

25
In line two in the above illustration, the teachers use a substitute word for the cookie which is

biscuits in British English. These two varieties of Languages have lexical variations which

facilitate L2 teachers to use the items as cross-referencing to communicate the target concept to

the learners.

4.3.4.2.2 Language transfer

Tarone (1981) defines ‘language transfer’ as borrowing, Faerch and Kasper (1980) considered

language transfer as an inter-lingual transfer, Bialystok and Frolich (1980) regarded language

transfer as L1 based strategies. The interlocutors use different aspects of L1 and inter-language

elements when they face a void in the production stage of their interaction. Language transfer

includes various features such as zero modification (code-switching) to many unifications at

phonological (foreignizing) and morphological (literal-translation) at lexemes level. The current

study focuses only on teachers language transfer to other than L2 in classroom discourse.

a) Code-switching

Code-switching refers to shift of language other than L2 in situations where both the interlocutors

share the same L1 and culture. They switch from the target language when they cannot find the

target word for the object in ESL/EFL settings, and they communicate to achieve the pedagogic

purposes in classroom discourse. The following example demonstrates the use of code-switching

by both the interlocutors.

Example 4. 24 [T5 L1]

S: 1 we take kabab and samosa with us

T: 2 okay, good idea, you must take kabab and samosa with you
26
 3: If you go for an outing you need to take kabab

Ss: 4 Huh huh huh

The use of code-switching in line 2 by the teacher and student reveal that both of the interlocutors

share the same culture and L1, there are no substitute words for these lexical items in the target

language to fill the linguistic gap. The speaker uses the code switching here as a contextualized

cue to help the hearer extract the targeted concept which they share in their culture. Wagner and

Firth (1997:333) argue that using code-switching as a communication strategies by both the

interlocutors, they reveal their shared identities and negotiate the meaning.

4.3.4.2.3 Non-linguistic strategies

Non-linguistic strategies are defined as the use of alternative means of communication for instance

gesticulations and drawing on external sources such as bi-lingual and monolingual dictionaries.

a) Mime

Mime refers to the use of gestures in communication to convey or complement the meaning of the

intended concept. The teachers occasionally use mimetic gestures to enhance the dramatic effect

in their classroom communication. There are many other sources that add to the effect of classroom

teaching or help in the identification of target concept such as the use of pictures, and posters but

the current study is only limited to the use of mimetic gestures based on its theoretical framework.

Example 4. 25 [T5 L3]

S: 1 guns are permitted

T: 2 yes, right. Gun is not permitted in the airport

3 why not permitted, when you press the trigger

27
 4 daz daz daz (mime the action)

Ss: 5 Huh

The above example illustrates the use of mimetic gestures in which the student introduce a concept

that guns are not permitted. The teacher in the following line act upon the use of a firearm to denote

the nature of the prohibition of guns because it is dangerous.

Keeping in view the above-mentioned sub-classification of lexical compensatory strategies, and

its relation with meaning negotiation strategies, there is a close association that links the two set

of strategies to fill the lexical gap on the one hand and provide help in-comprehension on the other

hand. The excerpts have demonstrated that these two types of strategies are used in different

context. The use of lexical compensatory strategies is implied in interactional sequences with a

purpose to establish a form-meaning association. The lexical compensatory strategy shift a

temporary focus to form but even then both the interlocutors engage in the communication and

intend to convey a message. The teacher uses lexical compensatory strategies in a classroom

discourse when he realizes the gap that a particular item might constrain the comprehension of the

students. In the following example, the teacher realizes the word ‘posh' as a problem source, and

he uses a substitution.

Example 4. 26 [T8 L2]

S: 1 we need a nice dressing

2 it is important in some places

T: 3 it is not important

S: 4 but sometimes

T: 5 definitely, nice dressing has its impact

6 if we want to give a good impression we need nice dress

28
 7 one has to wear a tie and shirt to visit a posh market

S: 8 Posh…

T: 9 expensive markets

S: 10 hmmm VIP and high class

Ss: 11 huh huh huh

T: 12 because sometimes you are not allowed to enter some places without a tie and shirt.

The above example reveals that due to the lexical deficiency in students' knowledge in line 8 bring

the communication to a stop. The teacher in the following lines span over some interactional

sequences to identify the concept, and the student succeeds in the identification of the concept

before they move on.

Lexical compensatory strategies often occur in discourse in which teacher and students both co-

construct the meaning of lexical items as an embedded strategy. Teachers facilitate the co-

construction in the interaction through meaning negotiation along with learners. The following

illustration exemplifies the use of embedded co-construction by the teacher meaning negotiation

and providing a lexical item for the target concept along with students' interaction. A lexical void

is dealt through meaning negotiation in classroom discourse.

Example 4. 27 [T1 L1]

S: 1 assassination

T: 2 okay, what is an assassination?

S: 3 Killing

T: 4 yes but a little difference

S: 5 to execute by someone expert in killing

T: 6 okay, it is a political murder

29
 7 we say Liaqat Ali Khan was assassinated

8 because it was a political killing

The above example demonstrates an embedded lexical compensatory strategy carried out through

meaning negotiation. The teacher implies clarification request in line 2, and he also uses

reformulation in line 6 in order to simplify the lexical items and help the students comprehend the

message. The co-construction of the interaction by implying lexical compensatory strategy and

meaning negotiation through the contextualized description in line 7 help in identifying the target

concept.

Meaning negotiation has a different orientation because the teacher is a facilitator in the

interaction. Implying meaning negotiation has the role in simplifying the input due to the limited

proficiency of L2 learners. Sometimes a target lexical items are required for appropriate input as

stated in the above example 4.31. For this reason, meaning negotiation is used to co-construct the

embedded information needed in a target concept. This type of co-construction is achieved through

the use of substitution and concept modification by implying compensatory strategy and meaning

negotiation in a given context.

In conclusion, we can say that teachers’ interaction includes both types of communication

strategies in classroom discourse. They use an integrated approach to deal with various problems

that occur in communication. Meaning negotiation strategy help in providing in vocabulary items

to the learner through interactive negotiation to clarify the concept by substitutions of lexical items.

Both strategies are co-constructed because lexical compensatory strategy provides new lexical

items and meaning negotiation strategy clarify the concept through negotiated input. Both types of

strategies are used to achieve pedagogic purposes. Lexical compensatory strategies are not used

30
for interactive exchanges but to facilitate the comprehension and used as an end to achieve the

purpose of communication.

4.4 Function of teachers' communication strategies in the classroom

The specific function of teachers’ communication strategies in classroom discourse are

demonstrated and exemplified from the above examples. The major function of teachers'

communication strategies is macro that achieves the overall purpose of communication while the

micro-level function focuses on the immediate purpose of communication in classroom settings.

Teachers' use of communication strategies has a double function as meaning negotiation as well

as focusing lexical compensation to provide new material to the learners in a pedagogical context.

Communication strategies are defined as retrospective and prospective measures dealing with

problem source that happen in interaction and breakdown the communication between the

interlocutors. Schegloff and Sacks (1973: 236) defined communication strategies as ‘reparatory’

and ‘locatory’ mechanisms. They argue that clarification requests are the reparatory procedure that

help in the identification of a problem and repair it in due course of time while comprehension

checks and confirmation checks are locator devices used in the identification of problems. In

classroom context threats to the breakdown of communication is considered more seriously. Three

main causes create trouble source in classroom communication. The first one is, the teacher

addresses a large number of students with different ages, levels, and backgrounds, secondly, due

to the interpersonal and intra-personal limitation that creates a threat to the message and becomes

difficult for the learners to indicate their problem in understanding a message. Thirdly, teachers'

role as manager gives them the upper hand to convey their message in an appropriate and

transparent way that students can easily understand and comprehend the target language.
31
The retrospective and prospective implication of lexical compensatory strategies have been

discussed above. The retrospective manifestation of strategy implied lexical items that had already

occurred in communication while prospective strategy happened when the teacher expressed a

concept and there appeared a lexical void that constrains the comprehension of the students.

Meaning negotiation is also differentiated based on the negotiation of meaning by the teachers in

communication. The use of turn-completion and other reformulation are considered as

retrospective because they dealt with the problems of the students that already existed. In contrast,

clarification requests, confirmation checks, other-repetition with low key rising intonation,

comprehension checks, cues, and self-reformulations are prospective strategies because they either

locate the problem-source or manage the communication to convey the intended message of the

speaker.

Some of the meaning negotiation strategies reveal that they are used by the teachers in order to

sustain the communication or show explicitness in effect the second interlocutor agrees and reach

a mutual understanding on a particular topic. The use of communication strategies serving this

purpose is classified as information oriented under the macro-function of CSs such as confirmation

checks, clarification requests, and other-repetition to incorporate the topic. The classification of

sustaining conversation under macro-function is different in the current study from meaning

negotiation defined by other studies. Varonis and Gass (1985b), Scarcella and Higa (1981)

describe the meaning negotiation as ‘conversational continuants' of the hearer devices to motivate

the speaker in continuation of the interaction. Van Lier (1988) considered them responses in

listening such as attention, and approval use by the teacher to encourage the learners to proceed.

Therefore these are not communication strategies, and they do not have a role in meaning

negotiation by the teacher in the classroom.

32
The following illustration shows the use of partial repetition by the teacher to sustain the

conversation and the student move on.

Example 4.28 [T4 L3]

S: 1 Karachi also

2 That time I was eight years old

T: 3 eight

4 could you remember more of that visit?

The repetition of the eight by the teacher drawback on the previous information and link it to the

following to proceed the move. It helps in continuation of the topic and the interlocutors sustain

the conversation. The repetition of the partial response of the students gives vigor to the

conversation and increase the volume of forthcoming information that is expected.

Based on the findings of the collected data teacher' use of communication strategies in the

classroom play a vital role to avoid breakdown communication between the teacher and students.

As in ESL/EFL context communication has dual functions in the classroom, one purpose is to

carry the message and secondly it is the ultimate target of pedagogical practices in the classroom.

4. 5 Summary

This chapter developed the categorization for the collected data. The distinction is made between

the two types of categories, meaning negotiation and lexical compensatory strategies at the

beginning of the chapter. Further, two sub-categorization is formed between the lexical

compensatory strategies that help the teacher to explain the meaning of lexical words. In

explanation of the meaning for the lexical items, the teacher either has to substitute the lexeme or

modify the concept by mentioning certain features of the target concept what the speaker intended.
33
The description of the characteristics for the target concept includes concrete links in the contexts

or abstract terms to make a connection with the target concept. Secondly, the code-switching as a

sub-category for lexical compensatory strategies were used by the teachers that demonstrated

cultural variations and the target words were not found by both the interlocutors.

Teachers' also use meaning negotiation strategies in their classroom interaction. The sub-

categories used by the teachers in meaning negotiation includes comprehension checks,

clarification requests, confirmation checks, other/self-reformulation, turn completion, other

repetition and cues. Meaning negotiation performs a double function to focus on content and code.

Confirmation checks and clarification requests are devised into two types such as information-

oriented and code-oriented strategies. Information-oriented strategies focus on the meaning in

communication while code-oriented function to resolve issues that occur due to the discrepancy

between form and meaning interaction. Other reformulation as a meaning negotiation strategy

used by the teachers for three purposes in communication: providing a substitute item to the

learners to communicate their intended message, secondly, summarizing utterances of the students

to make it more concise and finally, expand the message to convey the appropriate concept. The

exemplification and illustration of the categories in this chapter reveal the use of different

communication strategies by the teachers in different institutions. The procedures of quantification

and statistical analysis carried out in the next chapter is based on the themes of categories identified

in this chapter.

34