Alliance Formation During Disagreement in Group Discussion Among ESL Learners

  • Engku. M. Syafiq Department of English, Faculty of Modern Languages and Communication, Universiti Putra Malaysia, 43400 UPM Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia.
  • Shamala Paramasivam Department of English, Faculty of Modern Languages and Communication, Universiti Putra Malaysia, 43400 UPM Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7213-9445
  • Ilyana Jalaluddin Department of English, Faculty of Modern Languages and Communication, Universiti Putra Malaysia, 43400 UPM Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia.
  • Ramiza Darmi Department of English, Faculty of Modern Languages and Communication, Universiti Putra Malaysia, 43400 UPM Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia.
Keywords: disagreement, speech act, discourse strategies, alliance formation, group discussion

Abstract

The study examines how disagreement is managed by 32 intermediate level Malay ESL students in a Malaysian higher education setting in group discussion in terms of alliance formation. The group discussions in a group of four on a controversial topic were video-recorded to capture how they manage disagreements through the way they formed alliances among themselves throughout the discussion when they expressed opinions using English. The data analysis involved pragmatics as the approach to analyse speech acts and discourse strategies utilised by the participants when they manage disagreements in the discussion. The findings indicate that the participants draw themselves into alliance with one another using various discourse strategies. They managed disagreement in multiple ways using indirect speech acts, and various discourse strategies that are evident in the alliance-making process. The findings could have implications for future studies researching disagreement discourse. Apart from that, implications are also highlighted in terms of pedagogical approaches, and practices, especially in ESL settings. This encompasses the teaching content (e.g.: the importance of pragmatic competence), methodology (e.g.: useful expressions and strategies), and possible activities (e.g.: group discussion) that are effective in assisting teachers to get students to communicate in ESL classrooms.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Angouri, J., & Locher, M. A. (2012). Theorising disagreement. Journal of Pragmatics, 44(12), 1549–1553. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.06.011.

Angouri, J., & Tseliga, T. (2010). “You Have No Idea What You are Talking About!” From e-disagreement to e-impoliteness in two online fora. Journal of Politeness Research. Language, Behaviour, Culture, 6(1), 57-82. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/JPLR.2010.004.

Awang, S., Zakaria, W. N. F. W., & Razak, S. S. (2021). Social Interaction Strategies among Malay ESL Learners: Preserving Harmony in L2 Oral Communication. Malaysian Journal of ELT Research, 18(2), 48-68. DOI: https://doi.org/10.52696/XYPY5634.

Bardovi-Harlig, K., & Salsbury, T. (2004). The organization of turns in the disagreements of L2 learners: A longitudinal perspective. Studying Speaking to Inform Second Language Learning, 199-227.

Brett, J. M., Gunia, B. C., & Teucher, B. M. (2017). Culture and negotiation strategy: A framework for future research. Academy of Management Perspectives, 31(4), 288-308. DOI:https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2015.0195.

Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Dippold, D. (2011). Argumentative discourse in L2 German: A sociocognitive perspective on the development of facework strategies. The Modern Language Journal, 95(2), 171-187. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2011. 01175.x.

Doehler, S. P., & Pochon-Berger, E. (2011). Developing ‘methods’ for interaction: A cross-sectional study of disagreement sequences in French L2. In L2 Interactional Competence and Development (pp. 206-243). Multilingual Matters. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847694072-010.

Fujimoto, D. T. (2012). Agreement And Disagreement: Novice Language Learners in Small Group Discussion. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Temple University.

Kangasharju, H. (2002). Alignment in disagreement: Forming oppositional alliances in committee meetings. Journal of Pragmatics, 34(10-11), 1447-1471. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00073-5.

Kakavá, C. (2002). Opposition in Modern Greek discourse: Cultural and contextual constraints. Journal of Pragmatics, 34(10-11), 1537-1568. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00075-9.

Kerbrat-Orecchioni, C. (2010). The case for an eclectic approach to discourse-in-interaction. New Adventures in Language and Interaction, 71-96. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.196.04ore.

Konakahara, M. (2017). Interactional management of face-threatening acts in casual ELF conversation: An analysis of third-party complaint sequences. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca, 6(2), 313–343. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/jelf-2017-0015.

Lawson, A. J. (2009). From the classroom to the bar-room: Expressions of disagreement by Japanese speakers of English. Unpublished master’s thesis. University of Birmingham, United Kingdom.

Locher, M. (2010). Power and Politeness in Action: Disagreements in Oral Communication. Berlin, New York: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110926552

Maros, M., & Rosli, L. (2017). Politeness strategies in Twitter updates of female English language studies Malaysian undergraduates. 3L, Language, Linguistics, Literature, 23(1). DOI: https://doi.org/10.17576/3L-2017-2301-10.

Muntigl, P., & Turnbull, W. (1995). Rhetorical Influences on Arguing. In Proceedings of the 1995 Annual Conference of the Canadian Linguistics Association: Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics (pp. 385-396). University of Toronto Press. 129.

Muntigl, P., & Turnbull, W. (1998). Conversational structure and facework in arguing. Journal of Pragmatics, 29(3), 225-256. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(97)00048-9.

Paramasivam, S. (2007). Managing disagreement while managing not to disagree: Polite disagreement in negotiation discourse. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research, 36(2), 91-116. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17475750701478661.

Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language (Vol. 626). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139173438.

Spada, N., & Lightbown, P. M. (2009). Interaction research in second/foreign language classrooms. In Multiple perspectives on interaction (pp. 163-181). Routledge.

Searle, J. (1975). Indirect speech acts. In Cole P., & J.L. Morgan (Eds.), Speech Acts (pp. 59–82). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004368811_004

Sifianou, M. (2012). Disagreements, face and politeness. Journal of Pragmatics, 44(12), 1554-1564. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.03.009.

Toomaneejinda, A., & Harding, L. (2018). Disagreement practices in ELF academic group discussion: Verbal, nonverbal and interactional strategies. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca, 7(2), 307-332. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/jelf-2018-0016

Published
2022-07-28
How to Cite
Syafiq, E. M., Paramasivam, S., Jalaluddin, I. and Darmi, R. (2022) “Alliance Formation During Disagreement in Group Discussion Among ESL Learners”, Malaysian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities (MJSSH), 7(7), p. e001617. doi: 10.47405/mjssh.v7i7.1617.
Section
Articles