Lidya Utami (0643042021)

AN ANALYSIS OF NEGOTIATION OF MEANING IN INTERACTION OF SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISISITION

(as a final assignment of Second Language Acquisition)

BY:

LIDYA UTAMI

0643042021

S1 ENGLISH DEPARTMENT REGULAR

UNIVERSITY OF LAMPUNG

2010

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First of all, the writer would like to express their deepest gratitude to Allah SWT for all of His blessings so that she could finally accomplish the paper entitled “An Analysis of Negotiation of Meaning in Interaction of Second Language Acquisition”. Then, the writer would like to thank Mr. Drs. Hery Yufrizal, M.A., Ph.D. for his precious time helping her in accomplishing the paper. Finally, the writer would also like to thank her families and friends for their love and support.

This paper is made as assignment in Second language Acquisition. The writer realizes that this paper is not perfectly composed so that the writer would appreciate any criticism, comment and suggestion from the readers. Hopefully, this paper will be useful for all the readers.

           

 Bandar Lampung, 20 Desember 2010

The writer

I.       INTRODUCTION

I.1. Background of the problem

Communication plays an important role in second/foreign language acquisition. It is come from the idea that acquiring a language means having to communicate with the language. Moreover, Yufrizal (2008:74) states that second/foreign language acquisition occurs especially when learners are engaged in the use of the language for communication. Thus, it can be inferred that to acquire the language well, someone should communicate or interact with other using the target language.

Interaction is one of the aspect of communication that influences the success or failure of second and/or foreign language acquisition. (Yufrizal, 2008, p 74). This idea is in harmony with Pica, et al (1993:10) who claimed that language is best learned and taught through interaction. With the interaction, someone can gain comprehensible input and produce comprehended output that it useful for language acquisition.

According to Krashen (1985:2), second language learners acquire the target language by “understanding message” or by receiving “comprehensible input”. He furthermore argues that learners only acquire the second language if we received input a bit beyond our current level of competence (i + 1). In other words, a comprehensible input is necessary in second language acquisition, since it enables the learner to acquire the language better and faster.

One of the ways to gain comprehensible input is through the modification or negotiation of meaning. Negotiation of meaning can be defined as a series of exchanges conducted by addressors and addressees to help themselves understand and be understood by interlocutors (Yufrizal, 2008). In this case, when native speaker(NS) and non native speakers(NNS) are involved in an interaction, both interactants work together to solve any potential misunderstanding or non understanding that occurs, by checking each other’s comprehension, requesting clarification and confirmation and by repairing and adjusting speech (Pica, 1988). Not only comprehensible input, negotiation of meaning also provides learners opportunity to use the target language a much as possible.

In this paper, the writer tries to verify and prove that negotiation of meaning can occurred with the absence of the native speaker. This idea is supported by previous research done by Yufrizal in 2000. In this research, he involved forty students of English at a university in Indonesia who were then assigned to have interaction in English under three types of task: information gap task, jigsaw task and simulation task. The study reveals that Indonesian EFL students did negotiation of meaning despite the absence of native speakers in the interaction. Hence, the writer tries to conduct a simple research that involve four students of Lampung University with different level of English proficiency as the subject; two students from upper level of proficiency and two students from lower level of proficiency. Then, they are divided into two groups (group a and B) which each consist of one upper student and one lower student. Then she asks each group to do a conversation based on the task given. In this occasion, the writer gave an information gap task. Next, she records the conversation and makes transcription. Finally, she analyzes the transcriptions based on negotiation of meaning process.

I.2. The Objectives

• To verify theory dealing with theories of negotiation of meaning in second/foreign language acquisition
• To prove that negotiation of meaning process can occur in EFL contex

II. THEORITICAL FRAMEWORK

2.1 Negotiation of meaning in interactions

Negotiation of meaning is defined as a series of exchanges conducted by addressors and addressees to help themselves understand and be understood by their interlocutors. In this case, when native speakers(NSs) and non native speakers(NNs) are involved in an interaction, both interactants work together to solve any potential misunderstanding or non understanding that occurs, by checking each other’s comprehension. Requesting clarification and confirmation and by repairing and adjusting speech (Pica, 1988). The process of negotiation of meaning is illustrated by Figure 2.1

The figure shows how negotiation process occurs. For example, during communication exchanges in which addresses had difficulty understanding and addressor could restructure the conversation in order to make their input comprehensible to addressee and thus allow the conversation to continue. In this restructuring, addressors could, for example, pause and question addresses as to whether they understood, or sensing confusion on the addressees’ part, addressors could simply repeat themselves verbatim or in paraphrase. Use these same restructuring techniques could following utterances of addresses. Such techniques could be used following utterances of the addresses. Such modifications would give the interlocutors more opportunities to negotiate for message meaning and would allow addresses more time to process message content and thus sort out the confusion it triggered. Addresses could restructure the conversation through request to addressors for clarification or through utterances seeking to confirm whether what they heard was actually had been said. (Pica and Doughty, 1985)

FIGURE 2.1

Model of negotiation of meaning exchanges based on Pica and Doughty (1985)

Moreover, Varonis and Gass (1985) proposed a simpler model for the exchanges that create negotiation of meaning. The model consists of four primes called:

a.       Trigger (T) which invokes or stimulates incomplete understanding on the part of the hearer:

b.      Indicator (I) which is the hearer’s signal of incomplete understanding

c.       Response (R) is the original speakers’ attempt to clear up the unaccepted-input, and

d.      Reaction to the response (RR), which is an element that signals either the hearer’s acceptance or continued difficulty with the speaker’s repair. The model was elaborated into the following figure and the excerpt that follows:

The model contains two components: the triggers component (T) and the resolution component. The resolution contains three elements: indicator (I), response (RR). A trigger is defined as an utterance or portion of utterance on the part of the speaker, which results in some indications of non-understanding on the part of the hearer. The model suggest that from the trigger the hearer can indicate non-understanding (the indicator = 1) which can be responded to(R) by the speaker in various ways. Reactions to response (RR) can be produced by either the speaker or the hearer.

2.2 The roles of negotiation of meaning in second language acquisition

Since the study of negotiation of meaning has developed rapidly, various definition and description of negotiation of meaning are yielded. Beside the forms and definition of negotiation of meaning researchers also vary in their perception of the role of negotiation of meaning in second/foreign language acquisition. As Pica (1996) admits that although there has been no empirical evidence of a direct between negotiation of meaning and second/foreign language development, research studies in negotiation of meaning for the last two decades have shown that there are two obvious contribution of negotiation of meaning. Firstly, through negotiation of meaning (particularly interaction involving native speaker) non-native speaker obtain comprehensible input necessary for second language acquisition much more frequently than in interaction without negotiation of meaning. Secondly, negotiation of meaning provide opportunities for non-native speaker to produce comprehensible output necessary for second language acquisition much more frequently than in interactions without negotiation of meaning. Another important role of negotiation of meaning which may have direct impact on second language acquisition but is also an important element for second language learning through communication is that negotiation of meaning can function as an indication of pursuit of communication.

2.3 Negotiation of meaning and comprehensible input

Pica and doughty (1985a and b), Gass and Varonis, (1985);; Gass and Varonis (1994) were conducted studies to prove that through negotiation of meaning instead of justification of input, second language learners are able to understand the target language. On of the most popular examples of how native speaker provides negotiated comprehensible input to a nonnative speaker is the following example from Pica et al.

            Example;

            NS       : It’s got a chimney

            NNS    : chimney

            NS       : that’s where the smoke comes out of

In the example, the NS triggered an utterance that might not be understood by the NNs who signaled the misunderstanding by repeating the NS’s utterance to the word ‘chimney’. The NS’ responded to the signal by explaining the meaning of chimney. It was believed that if the NNS comprehended the message from the NS through such an exchange, second language acquisition occurred

Otrr examples of how native speakers provide comprehensible input to the non native speaker through the negotiation of meaning exchanges are given in example below:

            Example:

            NS         : where’s the plant?

            NNS      : huh?

            NSNNS : the plant (exaggerated intonation)

            NSN      : plant (said quietly to self) can spell it?

            NS         : P-L-A-N-T

            NNS      : oh, plant, it is left side near the window

The example shows how the two interactants tried to resolve a communication breakdown for the meaning of the word ‘plant’. The nonnative speaker signaled non-understanding by using a backchannel cue that functions as a request for clarification. The native speaker tried to explain by repeating the word(with exaggerated intonation). The nonnative speaker still showed no understanding by repeating the word hesitantly followed by a request to the native speaker to spell the word. The nonnative speaker comprehended the message after the spelling and the interaction could be continued. Here the modification made by the native speaker were not only in the form of modification of pronunciation but also by selling the word

From those two examples, it can be inferred that negotiation of meaning enable the interactants to get comprehensible input which led to the language acquisition.

2.4 Negotiation of meaning and modification of input

In conclusion, from the studies on comprehensible output reviewed above (Ellis, 1994; Swain and Lapkin, 1995; and Foster, 1988), we found that output indeed has an influence on the performance of second/foreign language learners, but how far the output influences language acquisition in general is still a matter of question.

2.6 Concept of information gap task

In an information gap activity, one person has certain information that must be shared with others in order to solve a problem, gather information or make decisions (Neu & Reeser, 1997). They give every student the opportunity to speak in the target language for an extended period of time and students naturally produce more speech than they would otherwise. Another advantage of information gap activities is that students are forced to negotiate meaning because they must make what they are saying comprehensible to others in order to accomplish the task (Neu & Reeser, 1997).

III. DISCUSSION

3.1 Subject

The writer takes four students of Lampung University with different level of proficiency as the subject; two students from upper level of English proficiency and two students from lower level of English proficiency. Then, they are divided into two groups (group A and B) which each consist of one upper student and one lower student:

Speakers:

Upper A (U_A)              Upper B (U_B)

Lower A (L_A)              Lower B (L_B)

3.2 Procedure of the research

In this research, the writer follows some procedures:

1. Finding sample

2. Dividing sample into two groups

3. Asking each group to do a conversation based on the task given. In this occasion, the writer gave an information gap task.

4. Recording the conversation and making transcription

5. Analyzing the transcriptions based on negotiation of meaning process.

6. Making report of finding

3.3 The task

The task used in this conversation is information gap task in the form of crossword puzzle. Thus, each group asked to complete a crossword puzzle by exchanging the information to each other.

		Get help filling in your crossword puzzle and give your partner help filling in their puzzle with words from your list.
Describing Words:
Do you know	an eight-letter		word that		begins with B? ends in Y?
Asking About Words:
How do you spell that?				It’s spelled B-L-U-S-T-E-R-Y.
What does that mean?				It’s another word for windy. It’s the opposite of calm.
Ask your partner for help filling in this puzzle.						Across 5. another word for windy 7. 9. 10. Down 1. 2. 3. 4. 6. 8.
Use these words to help your partner fill in his or her puzzle.

© 2006 Lanternfish ESL

		Get help filling in your crossword puzzle and give your partner help filling in their puzzle with words from your list.
Describing Words:
Do you know	a six-letter		word that		begins with B? ends in Y?
Asking About Words:
How do you spell that?				It’s spelled B-R-A-I-N-Y.
What does that mean?				It’s another word for smart. It’s the opposite of stupid.
Ask your partner for help filling in this puzzle.						Across 1. another word for smart 4. 6. 7. 8. Down 2. 3. 4. 5. 7.
Use these words to help your partner fill in his or her puzzle.

© 2006 Lanterfish ESL

3.4 Transcriptions

Transcription A ((Upper A (U_A) vs Lower A (L_A))

(U_A)     : hi!

(L_A)      : hi!

(U_A)     : here I have a crossword puzzle, and I have to complete it, can you help     me filling this puzzle?

(L_A)     : of course. I have too.

(U_A)     : do you mean that you have a crossword puzzle too?(confirmation)

(L_A)     : yes, and I need your help too.

(U_A)     : ok, we are helping each other.

(L_A)     : each other?(checking comprehension)

(U_A)     : yes, you and me helping (pointed)

(L_A)     : ok,ok

(U_A)     : ok, now do you know three letters word that begin with O?

(L_A)     : three letters word?

(U_A)     : yes, three letter word that begin with

(L_A)     : oh...it is Odd

(U_A)     : how do you spell that?

(L_A)     : it’s spelled O-D-D

(U_A)     : O-D-D. ok, what does that mean?

(L_A)     : it’s another word for strang

(U_A)     : (frowning her eyes) strang? How do you spell that?

(L_A)     : it’s spelled S-T-R-A-N-G-E.

(U_A)     : oh, it should be “strange” not “strang”

(L_A)     : oh sorry, strange. Ok now me..hm..hmhm..you know you know six letter word begin with C?

(U_A)     : do you know a six-letter word that begin with C?

(L_A)     :yes, do you know a six letter word that begin with C?

(U_A)     : wait a minute, I think it is chilly.

(L_A)     : cili?how you spell that?

(U_A)     : do you mean how do you spell that?

(L_A)     : yes, how do you spell that?

(U_A)     : it’s spelled C-H-I-L-L-Y. Chilly.

(L_A)     : ok, what mean?

(U_A)     : why does that mean?

(L_A)     : yes, what does that mean?

U_A)      : it’s the opposite of warm?

(L_A)     : (frowning) waam?

(U_A)     : yeah warm W-A-R-M.

(L_A)     : Oh, I see.

(U_A)     : well, now it’s my turn, do you know a six letter word that begin with S?

(L_A)     : a six-letter word that begin with S?

(U_A)     : yes, a six-letter word that begins with S

(L_A)     : oh, it’s simple           

(U_A)     : how do you spell that?

(L_A)     : S-I-M-P-L-E

(U_A)     : it’s spelled S-I-M-P-L-E

(L_A)     : yes,

(U_A)     : what does that mean?

(L_A)     : it’s another word for easy

(U_A)     : ok, so simple is another word for easy, isn’t it?

(L_A)     : yes. And now me....word terakhir..

(U_A)     : you mean the last word of yours?

(L_A)     : ya...do you know a six letter words begin with S?

(U_A)     : a six-letter word that begin with S?

(L_A)     : yes.

(U_A)     : it’s stinky

(L_A)     : pardon me?

(U_A)     : stinky.

(L_A)     : spell?

(U_A)     : you mean how do you spell that?

(L_A)     : ya.. How do you spell that?

(U_A)     : S-T-I-N-K-Y. Stinky

(L_A)     : stinky. it is like name of band in Indonesia.

(U_A)     : yeah it’s like the name of a band from Indonesia...but the meaning is not good.

(L_A)     : really? What does stinky mean?

(U_A)     : it’s another word for smelly

(L_A)     : (frowning)

(U_A)     : yeah S-M-E-L-L-Y. smelly

(L_A)     : oh smelly, I see...I see

(U_A)     : ok, I think my crossword puzzle has been complete. Thanks

(L_A)     : you are welcome, I have too.

(U_A)     : you mean you have completed your crossword puzzle too.

(L_A)     : yeah I have completed my crossword puzzle too. Thanks

(U_A)     : you are welcome.

Transcription B ((Upper B (U_B) vs Lower B (L_B))

(U_B)     : can you help me?

(L_B)     : yes, what can I do for you?

(U_B)     : I have a crossword puzzle, but I have lost some clues

(L_B)     : clues?

(U_B)     : yes clues...information...

(L_B)     : oh, I know, I will help you.

(U_B)     : ok, do you know three-letter wor that begin with O?

(L_B)     : begin with O,oh I know. It’s Odd.

(U_B)     : how do you spell that?

(L_B)     : o-de-de

(U_B)     : pardon me?

(L_B)     : o-de-de

(U_B)     : do you mean o-d-d?

(L_B)     : yes. O-d-d. Odd

(U_B)     : ok, what does that mean?

(L_B)     : it is another word for setrange

(U_B)     : sorry? How do you spell that?

(L_B)     : s-t-r-a-n-g-e

(U_B)     : oh, you mean strange. It should be pronounced strange not setrange

(L_B)     : yes, strange

(U_B)     :  so, odd is another word for strange, isn’t it?

(L_B)        : yes it is. Emm...I have...I have crossword puzzle too and...and I don’t know   some information

(U_B)     : you have a crossword puzzle too, and miss some clues or information?

(L_B)     : yes, and I...I need your help. Can you help me?

(U_B)     : yes of course.

(L_B)     : do you..do you..know a nine  letter word that begin by C?

(U_B)     : you mean, do you know a six-letter word that begins with (stress) C?

(L_B)     : yes, do you know a six-letter word that begin with C?

(U_B)     : wait a minute, oh, it’s chilly.

(L_B)     : how..how spell?

(U_B)     : how do you spell that?

(L_B)     : yes, how do you spell that?

(U_B)     : C-H-I-L-L-Y. Chilly

(L_B)     : what do mean?

(U_B)     : pardon?

(L_B)     : meaning...what meaning?

(U_B)     : what does that mean?

(L_B)     : yeah, what does that mean?

(U_B)     : it’s the opposite of warm.

(L_B)     : (frowning) waam?

(U_B)     : yes, warm. W-A-R-M

(L_B)     : Oh, warm. I see. So chilly is the opposite of warm?

(U_B)     : yes. Ok, now I need your help. Do you know a six letter word that begin with S?

(L_B)     : it is..it is...simple.

(U_B)     : how do you spell that?

(L_B)     : S-I-M-P-L-E. Simple

(U_B)     : simple? Ok, what does that mean?

(L_B)     : it is another word for easy

U_B)      : huh?

(L_B)     : easy

(U_B)     : esi? How do you spell that?

(L_B)     : E-A-S-Y

(U_B)     : oh. It’s easy

(L_B)     : yes easy.

(U_B)     : So simple is another word for easy

(L_B)     : yes. now, It’s me. Do you know a nine-letter word that begins with H?

(U_B)     : oh, it’s hazardous

(L_B)     : (frowning) how do you spell that?

(U_B)     : H-A-Z-A-R-D-O-U-S. Hazardous.

(L_B)     : hazardous. What does that mean?

(U_B)     : it is another word for dangerous?

(L_B)     : sorry?

(U_B)     : dangerous. D-A-N-G-E-R-O-U-S

(L_B)     : dangerous is bahaya in Indonesia ya?

(U_B)     : yes. Exactly!

(L_B)     : Oh, I see. Thanks for your help.

(U_B)     : you’re welcome. Now I have completed my crossword puzzle

3.5 Analysis   

After recording the conversation and making the transcription, the writer analyzes using negotiation of meaning process as proposed by Pica et al (1989).

Analyses of Transcription A:

From the conversation done with group A, the writer found that there are at least 9 (ten) process of negotiation of meaning which consist of four interrelated moves: Trigger (T), Indicator (I), Response(R), and Reaction to response (RR).

            Example 1:

            (U_A)     : ok, we are helping each other.

            (L_A)     : each other?

            (U_A)     : yes, you and me helping (pointed)

            (L_A)     : ok,ok

In the conversation above, the Upper A (U_A), triggered an utterance that is not understood by Lower A (L_A) who signaled the misunderstanding by repeating the word ‘each other’ which function as clarification request. . The (U_A) responded the signal by explaining the meaning of each other while giving non-verbal modification (pointed). The (L_A) comprehended the message and the interaction continued.

            Example 2:

            (U_A)     : ok, now do you know three letters word that begin with O?

            (L_A)     : three letters word?

            (U_A)     : yes, three letter word that begin with O

            (L_A)     : Oh, it is Odd

In the conversation above, the Upper A (U_A), triggered an utterance in which Lower A (L_A) might be not understood or not sure. Then (L_A) signaled the mis understanding by repeating only some words of the utterance that function as clarification request. The (U_A) responded the signal by repeating the trigger-unmodified utterance. The (L_A) comprehended the message and the interaction continued.

Example 3:

(L_A)     : it’s another word for strang

(U_A)     : (frowning her eyes) strang? How do you spell that?

(L_A)     : it’s spelled S-T-R-A-N-G-E.

(U_A)     : strange

(L_A)     : oh sorry, strange

Conversation above shows that (L_A) triggered an utterance in which the (U_A) had a problem in understanding the word “strange”. The (L_A) signaled her non understanding firstly by a nonverbal indicator (frowning her eyes) and asking for confirmation through repetition of the word. The (U_A) also ask (L_A) to spell the word. Finally, (U_A) comprehended the message and the interaction continued.

Example 4:

(L_A)     : Ok now me..hm..hmhm..you know you know six letter word begin with   C?

(U_A)     : do you know a six-letter word that begins with C?

(L_A)     : yes, do you know a six-letter word that begin with C?

(U_A)     : wait a minute, I think it is chilly.

Conversation above shows that (U_A) signaled uncertainty towards (L_A)’s utterance by asking clarification request through repetition. (L_A) responded the signal by repeating the unmodified trigger utterance. Finally, (U_A) understand the message and the conversation continued.

Example 5:

(U_A)     : it’s the opposite of warm?

(L_A)     : (frowning)

(U_A)     : yeah warm W-A-R-M.

(L_A)     : Oh, I see.

In the conversation above, (L_A) had a problem in understanding the word “warm” by showing nonverbal indicator(frowning her eyes). (U_A) responded by spelling the word “warm”. Finally, (L_A) comprehended the message after the spelling and interaction continued.

Example 6:

(U_A)     : well, now it’s my turn, do you know a six letter word that begin       with S?

(L_A)     : a six-letter word that begin with S?

(U_A)     : yes, a six-letter word that begins with S

(L_A)     : oh, it’s simple

Conversation above shows that (U_A) signaled uncertainty towards (L_A)’s utterance by asking clarification request through repetition. (L_A) responded the signal by repeating the unmodified trigger utterance. Finally, (U_A) understand the message and the conversation continued.

Example 7:

(U_A)     : now, your turn..

(L_A)     : yes. And now me....word terakhir..

(U_A)     : you mean the last word of yours?

(L_A)     : ya...do you know a six letter words begin with S?

(U_A)     : a six-letter word that begin with S?

(L_A)     : yes.

In conversation above, (U_A) signaled a misunderstanding with (L_A) trigger utterance that suddenly switches the code into Bahasa. (U_A) signaled by asking clarification request through elaboration. In this case we can see that (U_A); modification of input enable (L_A) in producing comprehensible output as well as acquiring the language.

Example 8:

(U_A)     : it’s stinky

(L_A)     : pardon me?

(U_A)     : stinky.

(L_A)     : spell?

(U_A)     : you mean how do you spell that?

(L_A)     : ya.. How do you spell that?

(U_A)     : S-T-I-N-K-Y. Stinky

The conversation shows that (L_A) signaled (U_A)’s trigger utterance by asking for clarification. Next (U_A) responded the indicator by repeating the word. (L_A) still didn’t understand with   (U_A)’s confirmation, so (L_A) asked to spell the word. Since (U_A) considered that (L_A) had uttered incorrect form, she repaired (L_A)’s incorrect utterance. Finally, after spelling the word (L_A) could understand the message and interaction continued.

Example 9:

(U_A)     : it’s another word for smelly

(L_A)     : (frowning)

(U_A)     : yeah S-M-E-L-L-Y. smelly

(L_A)     : oh smelly, I see...I see

In the conversation above, (L_A) had a problem in understanding the word “smelly” by showing nonverbal indicator(frowning her eyes). (U_A) responded by spelling the word “smelly”. Finally, (L_A) comprehended the message after the spelling and interaction continued

Analyses of Transcription B:

From the conversation done with group B, the writer found that there are at least 10(ten) process of negotiation of meaning which consist of four interrelated moves: Trigger (T), Indicator (I), Response(R), and Reaction to response (RR).

            Example 1:

(U_B)     : I have a crossword puzzle, but I have lost some clues

(L_B)     : clues?

(U_B)     : yes clues...information...

(L_B)     : oh, I know, I will help you.

In the conversation above, Upper B (U_B) triggered an utterance which followed by

(L_B) clarification request as indicator of misunderstanding. (U_B) reacted the response by giving semantic modification of trigger (clues = information). Finally, (U_A) understand the message and the conversation continued.

Example2:

(U_B)     : how do you spell that?

(L_B)     : o-de-de

(U_B)     : pardon me?

(L_B)     : o-de-de

(U_B)     : do you mean o-d-d?

(L_B)     : yes. O-d-d. Odd

(U_B)     : ok, what does that mean?

The conversation shows that (U_B) expressed misunderstanding of the spelling from (L_B) by asking for clarification request. (L_B) signaled (U_B) clarification by repeating unmodified trigger. Since (U_B) still didn’t get the point, she asking for clarification again followed by repair. Finally, (U_A) understand the message and the conversation continued.

Example 3:

(L_B)  : it is another word for setrange

(U_B)  : sorry? How do you spell that?

(L_B)  : s-t-r-a-n-g-e

(U_B)  : oh, you mean strange. It should be pronounced strange not setrange

(L_B)  : yes, strange

Conversation above shows that (L_B) triggered an utterance in which the (U_B) had a problem in understanding the word “strange”. The (L_B) signaled her non-understanding by clarification request and asking (U_B) to spell the word. Hearing   (L_B)’s incorrect pronunciation, (U_B) then correct it.   Finally, (U_B) comprehended the message and the interaction continued.

Example 4:

(L_B)  : do you..do you..know a nine  letter word that begin by C?

(U_B)  : you mean, do you know a six-letter word that begins with (stress) C?

(L_B)  : yes, do you know a six-letter word that begin with C?

(U_B)  : wait a minute, oh, it’s chilly

The conversation shows that (U_B) provided feedback the non-target like utterance of (L_B) who responded to the feedback by repeating the (U_B) utterance. Finally, (U_B) comprehended the message and the interaction continued. According to Lyster,(1998) call this feedback as recast. Long (1998) suggest that recast can stimulate NNs, in this case Lower B, to modify their output and thus help her to acquire the language.

Example 5:

(L_B)  : how..how spell?

(U_B)  : how do you spell that?

(L_B)  : yes, how do you spell that?

(U_B)  : C-H-I-L-L-Y. Chilly

The conversation shows that (U_B) realizing (L_B) incorrect utterance thus she gave correction by providing feedback/recast. Finally, (L_B) modified her trigger so (U_B) could comprehend the message and the interaction continued

Example 6:

(L_B): what do mean?

(U_B): pardon?

(L_B): meaning...what meaning?

(U_B): what does that mean?

(L_B): yeah, what does that mean?

In the conversation above, (U_B) signaled non-understanding of (L_B)’s utterance by a clarification request. The signal forced (L_B) to modify her previous utterance so that (U_B) could comprehended it

            Example 7:

            (U_B)     : it’s the opposite of warm.

            (L_B)     : (frowning) waam?

            (U_B)     : yes, warm. W-A-R-M

            (L_B)     : Oh, warm. I see. So chilly is the opposite of warm?

In the conversation above, (L_B) signaled non-understanding of (U_B)’s utterance by showing nonverbal indicator (frowning eyes) followed by a clarification request. (U_B) responded the signal by spelling the word “warm”. Finally, (U_B) comprehended the message and the interaction continued.

Example 8:

(L_B)  : it is another word for easy

U_B)   : huh?

(L_B)  : easy

(U_B)  : esi? How do you spell that?

(L_B)  : E-A-S-Y

(U_B)  : oh. It’s easy

(L_B)  : yes easy.

(U_B)  : So simple is another word for easy

(L_B)  : yes

In the conversation above, (U_B) signaled non-understanding of (L_B)’s utterance by a backchannel cue that function as clarification request. (L_B) tried to explain by repeating the word. (U_B) still show no understanding repeating the word followed by request to (L_B) to spell the word. Finally, after spelling the word (U_B) could understand the message and interaction continued. In this case, (L_B) produced input which comprehensible by (U_B)

Example 9:

(U_B)  : oh, it’s hazardous

(L_B)  : (frowning) how do you spell that?

(U_B)  : H-A-Z-A-R-D-O-U-S. Hazardous.

(L_B)  : hazardous. What does that mean?

In the conversation above, (L_B) signaled non-understanding of (U_B)’s utterance by showing nonverbal indicator (frowning eyes) followed by a clarification request to spell the word. (U_B) responded the signal by spelling the word “hazardous”. Finally, (L_B) comprehended the message and the interaction continued.

Example 10:

(U_B)  : it is another word for dangerous?

(L_B)  : sorry?

(U_B)  : dangerous. D-A-N-G-E-R-O-U-S

(L_B)  : dangerous is bahaya in Indonesia ya?

(U_B)  : yes. Exactly!

In the conversation above, (L_B) signaled non-understanding of (U_B)’s utterance by a clarification request. (U_B) responded (L_B)’s signal by spelling the word “dangerous”. Finally, after spelling the word (U_B) could understand the message and interaction continued although she asked confirmation check by code switching into Bahasa.

3.6 Comparison of Conversation A and B

In general, there are similarities and differences between conversation A and B. The differences between these two conversations lay on frequency of occurrence of negotiation of meaning process and speaker produced the modification. In conversation A, there are at least nine negotiation of meaning processes, in which the modifications are mostly done by upper level speaker in order to provide comprehensible input for lower level speaker. Meanwhile, there are at least ten negotiation of meaning process in conversation B, which the modifications are mostly done by lower level speaker in the form of output modification based on the upper’s signal of non-understanding. This modification output enables the upper level speaker to comprehend the message as well as continue the interaction.

The similarity between conversation A and B lays on the kind of modification done in the negotiation of meaning process. The writer finds that both modifications done in conversation A and B are in the form of clarification request using the word “sorry”?, “Pardon me”?,” what”?,“huh”?”can you spell the word”?, and confirmation check through repetition and completion or elaboration.

IV. CONCLUSION

In term of negotiation of meaning in interaction of second language acquisition, we can conclude that:

1. Negotiation of meaning can also occur in EFL context with the absence of Native speaker.
2. Speakers produce negotiation of meaning through asking for clarification, confirmation check and by correction and elaboration.
3. Modification in negotiation of meaning process can be done by both the lower level speaker and upper level speaker.

                               

V. REFERENCE

Sasson, Dorit,  Mar 15, 2008.Information Gap Activities: puzzle information gap.

http://bogglesworldesl.com/information_gap.htm

Yufrizal, Hery. 2008. An Introduction to Second Language Acquisition (A Text Book for ESL Learners and English Teachers). Pustaka Reka Cipta. Bandung.