Keywords
Strategies
Teamwork
Learning
How to Cite
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to know how students exchange and interpret discursive senses that sustain their expectations as partners, which take them to the achievement of a goal. The use of discursive styles was analyzed in four laboratory practices of "Models physics and chemistry on the analysis of water and quantification of oxygen" in Biology students of first semester were videotaped and transcribed. The method used in the laboratory practices to analysis the performance of different discursive styles were "systematic analysis of the content and thematic theorizing". As a result of the investigation it was found that students share experience, but were unable to coordinate together. The way they asked were demanding, confirming, directing, guiding, and they respond doubting, ordering, requiring. Sometimes the information that appears were not useful. For that reason is essential to modify these discursive styles to promote and motivate planning, direction and collaboration among students to carry out practices.
References
Auer, P., y Di Luzio, A. (Coords.) (1992). The contextualization of language. Ámsterdam: John Benjamins.
Calsamiglia, H., y Tusón, A. (1999). Las cosas del decir. Manual de análisis del discurso. Barcelona: Ariel.
Charmaz, K. (2002). Qualitative interviewing and grounded theory analysis. En J. Gubrium y J. Holstein (Eds.), Handbook of interview research: Context and Method. Thousand Oaks, C. A.: Sage.
Coll, C., y Onrubia, J. (2001). Estrategias discursivas y recursos semióticos en la construcción de sistemas de significados compartidos entre profesor y alumnos. Investigación en la escuela, 45, 21-31.
Cordella, M. (1999). Medical discourse in a Hispanic environment: Power and sympathy under investigation. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 22(2), 35-50.
Cordella, M. (2004). The dynamic consultation. A discourse analytical study of doctor-patient communications. Ámsterdam: J. Benjamins.
Domínguez, S. L. (2007). "Yo si quiere se lo explico". Control y poder en interacciones entre clientes y empleados. Oralia, 10, 103-134.
Duranti, A. y Donald B. (coords.) (1986). The audience as coauthor.
Special issue of text, 6(3), 239-247.
Erickson, F. (1986). Listening and speaking. En D. Tannen (Coord.), Languages and linguistics: The interdependence of theory, data, and application. Georgetown University Round Table on Language and Linguistics 1985. Washington: Georgetown University Press,
pp. 294-319.
Erickson, F., y Jeffrey, S. (1982). The counselor as gatekeeper: Social interaction in interviews. Nueva York: Academic Press.
Estrauss, A., y Corbin, J. (1990) Basic of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park: Sage.
Estrauss. A., y Corbin, J. (1998) Basic of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. (2a. ed.) Thousand Oaks, C. A.: Sage.
Falk, J. (1980). The conversational Duet. En B. R. Bruce, C., Hoffman, M., Silva, M., y Oosten, V. (Coord.), Proceedings of the sixth annual meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society. Berkeley: University of California, pp. 507-514.
Ferrara, K. (1992). The interactive achievement of a sentence: Joint productions in therapeutic discourse. Discourse Processes, 15, 207-228.
Foucault, M. (1982). Vigilar y castigar. Madrid: Siglo XXI.
Fuentes, C., y Alcaide, E. (2007). La argumentación lingüística y sus medios de expresión. Madrid: Arco/Libros.
Gallardo, P. (1996). Análisis conversacional y pragmática del receptor.
Valencia: Episteme.
Glaser, B., y Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago: Aldine Publishing.
Goodwin, C. (1981). Conversational Organization: Interaction between Speakers and Hearers. Nueva York: Academic Press.
Greenwood, A. (1989). Discourse variation and social comfort: A study of topic initiation and interruption patterns in the dinner conversation of preadolescent children. Tesis doctoral no publicada, City University of New York.
Grice, P. (1975). Logic and conversation. En P. Cole y J. Morgan (Coords.), Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts. Nueva York: Academic Press, pp. 51-58.
Gumperz, J. (1982). Discourse Strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Heritage, J. (1997). Conversation analysis and institucional talk: analyzing data. En D. Silverman (Coord.), Qualittive research: Theory, method and practice. Londres: Sage, pp. 161-82.
Hernán, P.. y Samaniego, J. L. (1998). Marcadores pragmáticos de apoyo discursivo en el habla culta de Santiago de Chile. Onomázein, 3, 11-25.
Jefferson, G. (1979). A technique for inviting laughter and its subsequent acceptance declination. En G. Psathas (coord.), Everyday languag: Studies in ethnomethodology. Nueva York: Irvington,
pp. 79-96.
Kochman, T. (1981). Black and white styles in conflict. Chicago: Universtiy of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, R. (1975). Language and woman’s place. Nueva York: Harper and Row.
Lakoff, R. (1979). Stylistic strategies within a grammar of style. En J. Orasanu, M. Slater y L. Adler (Coords.), Language, Sex, and Gender. Annals of the New York Academy of Science, 327, pp. 53-78
Lomas C., Osoro, A., y Tusón, A. (1993). Ciencias del lenguaje,competencia comunicativa y enseñanza de la lengua. Barcelona: Paidós.
McDermott, R., y Tylbor, H. (1983). On the necessity of collusion in conversation. Text 3(3), 277-297.
Moreno, F. (2002). Producción, expresión e interacción oral. Madrid: Arco/Libros.
Patton et al. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. London: Sage Publication.
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E., y Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50, 696-735.
Sandig, B.. y Selting, M. (2000). Estilos del discurso. En T. van Dijk (coord.), El discurso como estructura y proceso. Estudios sobre el discurso I. Una aproximación multidisciplinaria. Barcelona: Gedisa,
pp. 207-231.
Schegloff, E. (1982). Discourse as an interactional achievement: Some uses of 'uhuh' and other things that come between sentences. En D. Tannen (coord.), Analyzing discourse: Text and talk. Georgetown University Round Table on Language and Linguistics 1981. Washington: Georgetown U. Press, pp. 71-93.
Schegloff, E. (1988). Discourse as an interactional achievement II: An exercise in conversation analysis. En D. Tannen (coord.), Linguistics i Context: Connecting Observation and Understanding. Norwood: Ablex, pp. 135-158.
Schiffrin, D. (1984). Jewish argument as sociability. Language Society, 13(3), 311-335.
Smitherman, G. (1994). Black talk: Words and phrases from the hood to the amen corner. Nueva York: Houghton Miffin.
Shuy, R. (1982). Topic as the unit of analysis in a criminal law case, En D. Tannen (1984). Conversational Style: Analyzing Talk among Friends. Nowood: Ablex
Tannen, D. (1994). Gender and Discourse. Nueva York: Oxford University Press.
.Tannen, D. (1984). Conversational Style: Analyzing Talk among Friends.
Norwood: Ablex.
Tusón, V. (1999). Diferencia sexual y diversidad lingüística. En C. Lomas (coord.) ¿Iguales o diferentes? Género, diferencia sexual, lenguaje y Educación? Barcelona: Paidós, pp. 85-100.
Tusón, V. (2002b). Lenguaje, interacción y diferencia sexual, en
A. González y Lomas (coords.), Mujer y educación. Educar para la igualdad, educar desde la diferencia. Barcelona: Graó,
pp. 61-76.
Zimmerman, D. y West, C. (1975). Sex roles, interruptions and silences in conversation. En B. Thorne y N. Henley (coords.), Language and sex: difference and dominance. Rowley: Newbury House, pp. 105-129.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2024 Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México