Varonis and Gass four-phase model of negotiation of meaning routines¶

Theory · All theories
Evidence · 2 claims (2 for) · 1 study (1 causal), q2 · 0 of 1 report an effect size · 2 claims rest on one study

Description¶

The chapter adopts the Varonis and Gass (1985) four-phase model of negotiation routines as its analytical framework: "The first attempt at modeling negotiation routines was made by Varonis and Gass (1985) who designed a four-phase model". Phase one is a trigger (lexical, grammar-based, syntax-based or content-based); phase two is a signal of non-comprehension (clarification request, confirmation check or comprehension check); phase three is the response (self-repetition, paraphrase or incorporation); and the optional phase four is a reaction to the response signalling the routine's end. The study operationalises this model as an annotation scheme (Table 2) applied in EXMARaLDA to all three CMC datasets.

Design Implications¶

Context¶

Requirements¶

• Interactions must contain identifiable trigger, signal, response and optional reaction moves that can be annotated on speaker-dependent tiers

Constraints¶

• The reaction phase is optional in the model, and the article found no combined trigger types in its data

Target Learners¶

• non-native speaker university students of English (first year Master's biology students)

Target Learning Objectives¶

• development of interactional competence and negotiation of meaning in a second language

Claims¶

• Cmc Meaning Focused Tasks Foster Negotiated Interactions [+M]
• Content Triggers Dominate Syntactic Triggers Absent Text Chat [+M]

Related Theories¶

• Negotiation of meaning sequences model (Varonis & Gass, revised by Smith) with trigger and resolution parts
• Long's interaction hypothesis

Examples¶

• EXMARaLDA-based annotation scheme for negotiation of meaning and negative feedback in CMC data

Key Sources¶

• Sarré, C. (2011). Computer-mediated negotiated interactions: how is meaning negotiated in discussion boards, text chat and videoconferencing? In S. Thouësny & L. Bradley (Eds.), Second language teaching and learning with technology: views of emergent researchers (pp. 189-210). Dublin: Research-publishing.net. https://dx.doi.org/10.14705/rpnet.2011.9781908416001