Meaning negotiation is the most frequent form of interactional feedback in naturalistic conversation partner interaction, and explicit correction does not occur¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · qualitative r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2015 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Meaning negotiation accounted for 55% of interactional feedback instances, comprising two clarification requests and three comprehension checks, and there were no explicit corrections. → Ranaweera 2015

Evidence¶

Ranaweera 2015¶

Mahishi Ranaweera. (2015). Interactional Feedback in Naturalistic Interaction between L2 English Learners. English Language Teaching, 8(11). https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v8n11p47

q2 · i? · qualitative · r2

Frequency analysis of the coded recordings (Table 1 reports five meaning negotiations, three recasts, zero explicit corrections, one modified output). The article states meaning negotiation was "most frequent form of interactional feature is meaning negotiation (55%)" and that "There were no explicit corrections."

"Out of the meaning negotiation occurrences two were clarification requests and three were comprehension checks. Looking at the data it is very clear that most frequent form of interactional feature is meaning negotiation (55%). There were no explicit corrections."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Interactional feedback occurs in naturalistic learner-learner conversation outside the classroom, but at a very low frequency — related
• All meaning negotiation strategies appear in child EFL peer interaction except comprehension checks, which are absent — related
• Meaning negotiation in the conversation partner group occurred between the conversation leader and a partner rather than between two conversation partners — related
• Within-language strategy profiles differ: other-repetition prevails in the L2 while clarification requests prevail in the L1, with negative feedback least used — related