Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-qc88w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-08-19T04:09:23.184Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Meaning-making in online language learner interactions via desktop videoconferencing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 July 2016

H. Müge Satar
H. Müge Satar*
Affiliation:
Boğaziçi University, Istanbul, Turkey (email: muge.satar@boun.edu.tr)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Online language learning and teaching in multimodal contexts has been identified as one of the key research areas in computer-aided learning (CALL) (Lamy, 2013; White, 2014).1 This paper aims to explore meaning-making in online language learner interactions via desktop videoconferencing (DVC) and in doing so illustrate multimodal transcription and analysis as well as the application of theoretical frameworks from other fields. Recordings of learner DVC interactions and interviews are qualitatively analysed within a case study methodology. The analysis focuses on how semiotic resources available in DVC are used for meaning-making, drawing on semiotics, interactional sociolinguistics, nonverbal communication, multimodal interaction analysis and conversation analysis. The findings demonstrate the use of contextualization cues, five codes of the body, paralinguistic elements for emotional expression, gestures and overlapping speech in meaning-making. The paper concludes with recommendations for teachers and researchers using and investigating language learning and teaching in multimodal contexts.

Keywords

multimodal analysismultimodal transcriptiondesktop videoconferencingonline language learningsemioticsinteractional sociolinguistics

Information

Type
Regular papers
Information
ReCALL , Volume 28 , Special Issue 3: Multimodal Environments in CALL , September 2016 , pp. 305 - 325
Copyright
Copyright © European Association for Computer Assisted Language Learning 2016 

Access options

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

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

1

The data presented in this paper is based on a PhD study conducted at the Open University, UK (Satar, 2010). The theory of social presence within a community of inquiry (Rourke, Anderson, Garrison and Archer, 1999) formed the theoretical framework for the study. See Satar (2015) for details of the qualitative approach adopted for theory development, specifically for one component of the framework, i.e. sustaining interaction.

References

Afifi, W. A. (2007) Nonverbal communication. In: Whaley, B. B. and Samter, W. (eds.), Explaining communication: Contemporary theories and exemplars. New Jersey: Erlbaum, 39–60.Google Scholar
Andersen, P. A. (1998) Nonverbal communication: Forms and functions. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield Publishing.Google Scholar
Andersen, P. A. (2008) Nonverbal communication forms and functions (2nd edn.). Illinois: Waveland Press Inc.Google Scholar
Baldry, A. and Thibault, P. J. (2006) Multimodal transcription and text analysis: A multimedia toolkit and coursebook. London: Equinox.Google Scholar
Canto, S., Jauregi, M. K. and van den Bergh, H. H. (2013) Integrating cross-cultural interaction through video-communication and virtual worlds in foreign language teaching programs. Burden or added value? ReCALL, 25(1): 105–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cappellini, M. and Rivens Mompean, A. (2015) Role taking for teletandem pairs involved in multimodal online conversation: Some proposals for counselling practice. Language Learning in Higher Education, 5(1): 243–264.Google Scholar
Creswell, J. W. (2007) Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches, (2nd edn.). London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Develotte, C., Guichon, N. and Vincent, C. (2010) The use of the webcam for teaching a foreign language in a desktop videoconferencing environment. ReCALL, 22(3): 293–312.Google Scholar
Dörnyei, Z. (2007) Research methods in applied linguistics: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methodologies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Flewitt, R., Hampel, R., Hauck, M., Lancaster, L. and Jewitt, C. (2009) Multimodal data collection and transcription. In: Jewitt, C. (ed.), The Routledge handbook of multimodal analysis. London: Routledge, 40–53.Google Scholar
Goffman, E. (1955) On face-work: An analysis of ritual elements in social interaction. Psychiatry: Journal of Interpersonal Relations, 18(3): 213–231.Google Scholar
Guichon, N. and Cohen, C. (2014) The impact of the webcam on an online L2 interaction. Canadian Modern Language Journal, 70(3): 331–354.Google Scholar
Gumperz, J. J. (1982) Discourse strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gumperz, J. J. (2003) Interactional sociolinguistics: A personal perspective. In: Schiffrin, D., Tannen, D. and Hamilton, H. E. (eds.), The handbook of discourse analysis. Oxford: Blackwell, 215–228.Google Scholar
Jauregi, K. and Banados, E. (2008) Virtual interaction through video-web communication: A step towards enriching and internationalizing language learning programs. ReCALL, 20(2): 183–207.Google Scholar
Jefferson, G. (1984) Notes on some orderlinesses of overlap onset. In: D’Urso, V. and Leonardi, P. (eds.), Discourse analysis and natural rhetoric. Padua, Italy: Cleup Editore, 11–38.Google Scholar
Jefferson, G. (2004) Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. In: Lerner, G. H. (ed.), Conversation analysis: Studies from the first generation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 13–31.Google Scholar
Jewitt, C. (2016) Multimodal analysis. In: Georgakopoulou, A. and Spilioti, T. (eds.), The Routledge handbook of language and digital communication. Abingdon and New York: Routledge, 69–84.Google Scholar
Knapp, M. L. (1980) Essentials of nonverbal communication. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
Kress, G. R. and van Leeuwen, T. (2001) Multimodal discourse: The modes and media of contemporary communication. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Lamy, M. N. (2009) Multimodality in second language conversations online: Looking for a methodology. In: Baldry, A. and Montagna, E. (eds.), Interdisciplinary perspectives on multimodality: Theory and practice. Campobasso, Italy: Palladino, 385–403. https://edutice.archives-ouvertes.fr/edutice-00387133/document Google Scholar
Lamy, M. N. (2013) Distance CALL online. In: Thomas, M., Reinders, H. and Warschauer, M. (eds.), Contemporary computer-assisted language learning. London: Bloomsbury, 141–158.Google Scholar
Lamy, M. N. and Flewitt, R. (2011) Describing online conversations: Insights from a multi- modal approach. In: Develotte, C., Kern, R. and Lamy, M. N. (eds.), Décrire la conversation en ligne: Le face à face distanciel. [Describing online conversation: face-to-face in distance mode]. Lyon, France: ENS Editions, 71–94.Google Scholar
Lu, R., Goodale, T. and Guo, Y. (2014) Impact of videoconference with native English speakers on Chinese EFL learners’ oral competence and self-confidence. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 2(2): 54–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norris, S. (2004) Analyzing multimodal interaction: A methodological framework. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Norris, S. and Makboon, B. (2015) Objects, frozen actions, and identity: A multimodal (inter)action analysis. Multimodal Communication, 4(1): 43–59.Google Scholar
O’Halloran, K. L. (2015) Multimodal digital humanities. In: Pericles Trifonas, P. (ed.), International handbook of semiotics. London: Springer, 389–415.Google Scholar
Rapley, T. (2007) Doing conversation, discourse and document analysis. London: Sage Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richards, K. (2003) Qualitative inquiry in TESOL. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Richmond, V. P., McCroskey, J. C. and Payne, S. K. (1991) Nonverbal behavior in interpersonal relations (2nd edn.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Rourke, L., Anderson, T., Garrison, D. R. and Archer, W. (1999) Assessing social presence in asynchronous text-based computer conferencing. The Journal of Distance Education, 14(2): 50–71.Google Scholar
Sacks, H. (1992) Lectures on conversation. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Satar, H. M. (2010) Social presence in online multimodal communication: A framework to analyse online interactions between language learners (Unpublished PhD thesis). The Open University, Milton Keynes, UK.Google Scholar
Satar, H. M. (2013) Multimodal language learner interactions via desktop videoconferencing within a framework of social presence: Gaze. ReCALL, 25(1): 122–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Satar, H. M. (2015) Sustaining multimodal language learner interactions online. CALICO Journal, 32(3): 480–507.Google Scholar
Schegloff, E. (2000) Overlapping talk and the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language in Society, 29(1): 1–63.Google Scholar
Sindoni, M. G. (2013) Spoken and written discourse in online interactions: A multimodal approach. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Stickler, U., Batstone, C., Duensing, A. and Heins, B. (2007) Distant classmates: Speech and silence in online and telephone language tutorials. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 2007(2). http://www.eurodl.org/materials/contrib/2007/Stickler_Batstone_Duensing_Heins.html Google Scholar
Swann, J. (2010) Transcribing spoken interaction. In: Hunston, S. and Oakey, D. (eds.), Introducing applied linguistics: Concepts and skills. London: Routledge, 163–176.Google Scholar
Tannen, D. (2005) Conversational style: Analyzing talk among friends. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tannen, D. (2012) Turn-taking and intercultural discourse and communication. In: Paulston, C., Kiesling, S. and Rangel, E. (eds.), The handbook of intercultural discourse and communication. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, 135–157.Google Scholar
van Leeuwen, T. (2005) Introducing social semiotics. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
van Lier, L. (2004) The ecology and semiotics of language learning: A sociocultural perspective. Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
Wang, Y. (2004a) Supporting synchronous distance language learning with desktop videoconferencing. Language Learning & Technology, 8(3): 90–121.Google Scholar
Wang, Y. (2004b) Distance language learning: Interactivity and fourth-generation internet-based videoconferencing. CALICO Journal, 21(2): 373–395.Google Scholar
Wang, Y. (2006) Negotiation of meaning in desktop videoconferencing-supported distance language learning. ReCALL, 18(1): 122–145.Google Scholar
Wang, Y. (2007) Task design in videoconferencing-supported distance language learning. CALICO Journal, 24(3): 591–630.Google Scholar
Wang, Y. (2008) Distance language learning and desktop videoconferencing. Saarbrücken, Germany: VDM Verlag Dr. Müller.Google Scholar
White, C. (2014) The distance learning of foreign languages: A research agenda. Language Teaching, 47(4): 538–553.Google Scholar
Yin, R. K. (2003) Case Study Research: Design and Methods (3rd edn.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google Scholar