Sociolinguistics and Language Education.pdf

Classroom Discourse Analysis 543
listening to the tape and, using the categories listed in Figure 19.1 as
an initial guide, identify instances of talk that make this event distinctive.
For example, listen for multilingualism and its effects; listen for
the use of names and nicknames; listen for greetings, brand names,
praise or politeness tokens. Begin to characterize this event’s normative
language patterns. Transcribe those instances of talk that are
most relevant to this characterization.
(3) Look for variation in language use within that event or across comparison
events. You may want to investigate the participation of one
‘disruptive’ student, as Griffi n did. Alternatively, like Philips, you
may want to investigate how certain students participate differently
across different events.
Once you have recorded an event, transcribed it, and begun to see the
repertoires in play, you will be hooked. And, as you begin to see how language
use differs across events, you discover a vast range of communicative
repertoires. This can be empowering for a teacher and for students. As
you become more metalinguistically facile, you will be able to more clearly
identify the kinds of language use in your classroom, and to more clearly
articulate for students the kinds of language you hope they will be able to
produce in different situations.
Conclusion: Understanding Communicative Repertoires as
a Postmethods Pedagogy
Walk into any United States public school in a major metropolitan area.
Look around. Listen. Stroll down the hall. Step into a classroom. What do
you see? What do you hear? Chances are you see and hear dozens of communicative
repertoires in play, many of which are only minimally understood
by you. Imagine you are a language teacher in this context. What are
your responsibilities here? How could you possibly be the ‘expert’? I am
suggesting that by developing understandings of communicative repertoires
in their teaching context, teachers can become experts in helping
students navigate this complex communicative terrain.
Classroom discourse analysis, then, can be a way of implementing what
Kumaravadivelu (2001) has called ‘postmethods’ pedagogy. Why postmethods?
Teaching methods, especially in the language classroom, presuppose
a ‘language’ that must somehow be transmitted into students’ heads.
Even a method like the ‘communicative approach’ sees communication as
a means to a different end: correct, native-like language use. What I am
proposing is awareness of communicative repertoires as an end in itself.
This would not be achieved by role-playing or by invoking imaginary repertoires
of ‘native speakers’, but through a collective empirical investigation
of circulating repertoires and their everyday uses and misuses.