Conversational Dominance in Thai Language and Factors Relating to Social Status
A Case Study of Conversation between Teachers and Students in Mister O Corpus
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.69598/artssu.2023.1853.Keywords:
conversational dominance, teachers and students, Mister O Corpus, social status, conversation analysisAbstract
Conversational dominance is a significant topic of scholarly interest. This article aimed to examine conversational dominance in Thai language in relation to status. The research focused on the relationship between teachers and students as a representative of different statuses. The data was elicited from two sets of conversations in Mister O Corpus: 9 pairs of task-based conversations and 9 pairs of experience-exchanged conversations. The entire length was 145.3 minutes. The frameworks proposed by Linell et al. and Itakura were adopted in this study. The findings revealed that status affected conversational dominance in Thai society. In other words, the teachers dominated the conversations in terms of length and sequence of turns. Nonetheless, it was found that both teachers and students attempted to dominate their interactions when it came to participation. This finding significantly reflected that the teacher–student relationship in present day Thai society is likely to have less power distance.
Downloads
References
Adelswärd, V., Aronsson, K., Jönsson, L., & Linell, P. (1987). The unequal distribution of interactional space : Dominance and control in courtroom interaction. Text, 7, 313-346.
Am-Ugsorn, P. (2007). The strategies of cancellation in Thai : A case study of hearer of different status. Master Thesis, M.A. in Arts, Chulalongkorn University, Thailand. (In Thai)
Bandhumedha, N. (1998). Thai views of man as a social being. In Pongsapich, A. (Ed.), Traditional and changing Thai world view, Bangkok: Chulalongkorn University Press.
Bilous, F.R., & Krauss, R.M. (1988). Dominance and accommodation in the conversational behaviours of same- and mixed-gender dyads. Language & Communication, 8(3-4), 183-194.
Bunnag, O. (2007). Strategies for expressing disappointment in Thai to hearers of different social status : a case study of university students. Master Thesis, M.A. in Arts, Chulalongkorn University, Thailand. (In Thai)
Greif, E.B. (1980). Sex differences in parent-child conversations. Women’s Studies International Quarterly, 3(2-3), 253-258.
Gunnarsson, B. (1997). Women and men in the academic discourse community. In Kotthoff, H. and Wodak, R. (Eds.), Communicating gender in context, pp. 219-248, Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Gustavsson, L. (1988). Language taught and language used : dialogue processes in dyadic lessons of Swedish as a second language compared with non-didactic conversations. Doctoral Dissertation, Linköpings Universitet, Sweden.
Hasanam, N. (2015). Backchannels adopted by participants of equal status in Thai conversation. Master Thesis, M.A. in Arts, Chulalongkorn University, Thailand. (In Thai)
Itakura, H. (2001). Describing conversational dominance. Journal of Pragmatics, 33(12), 1859-1880.
Itakura, H. (2001). Conversational Dominance and Gender: A Study of Japanese Speakers in First and Second Language Contexts. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Itakura, H., & Tsui, A.B.M. (2004). Gender and Conversational Dominance in Japanese Conversation. Language in Society, 33(2), 223-248.
Kollock, P., Blumstein, P., & Schwartz, P. (1985). Sex and Power in Interaction: Conversational Privileges and Duties. American Sociological Review, 50, 34-46.
Linell, P. (1998). Approaching dialogue: Talk, interaction and contexts in dialogical perspectives. Amsterdam: J. Benjamins.
Linell, P., & Gustavsson, L. (1987). Initiativ och respons : om dialogens dynamik, dominans och koherens. Linköping: Univ.
Linell, P., Gustavsson, L., & Juvonen, P. (1988). Interactional dominance in dyadic communication: A presentation of initiative-response analysis. Linguistics, 26, 415-442.
Mayouf, M.A. (2014). Discourse modalities that reflect different interactants’ status in Arabic teacher/student and student/student task-oriented dialogues in Libya. In Language, Time and Space, Sociolinguistics Symposium 20, June 15-18, 2014. Jyvaskyla, Finland.
Panpothong, N. (2001). Thai ways of saying ‘no’ to a request. Manusya, 4(2), 63-76.
Panpothong, N., & Phakdeephasook, S. (2018). Task-based conversation in Thai and related socio-cultural factors: A case study of the Thai Mister O Corpus. Language and Linguistics, 36, 1-30. (In Thai)
Panyametheekul, S. (2006). Conversational Dominance in a Thai Chat Room. In Wisdom and Dynamism in the Global Context, International Conference on Thai Language and Literature, November 12, 2006. Faculty of Arts, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Patcharatmora, J. (2001). A study of making apologies in Thai by speakers of different social status. Master Thesis, M.A. in Arts, Chulalongkorn University, Thailand. (In Thai)
Rasikawan, N. (2001). Conversational Dominance in Formal and Informal Communicative Situations. Master Thesis, M.A. in Arts, Chulalongkorn University, Thailand. (In Thai)
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E.A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organisation of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50(4), 696-735.
Saisuwan, P. (2017). Conversational dominance in Thai male and female speech. In Prasithrathsint, A. (Ed.), A collection of research papers in sociolinguistics and ethnolinguistics, pp. 298-331, Bangkok: Chulalongkorn University Press. (In Thai)
Sinlarat, P. (2014). Prawat Kansueksa Thai : Mong Phan Yuk Samai Khong Rongrian ; Kansueksa Kap Sangkhom Thai : Mong Phan Yuk Samai Khong Kan Phatthana. [Thai educational history: From the perspective of the era of school; Education and Thai Society: From the perspective of the era of development]. Bangkok: College of Education, Dhurakij Pundit University. (In Thai)
Smuckarn, S. (1998). Thai peasant world view. In Pongsapich, A. (Ed.), Traditional and changing Thai world view, p. 166, Bangkok: Chulalongkorn University Press.
Suphab, S. (1991). Sangkhom Lae Watthanatham Thai : Khaniyom Khropkhrua Satsana Prapheni. [Thai society and culture: values, family, religion, traditions]. Bangkok: Thai Wattana Panit. (In Thai)
Tanasitisurachot, N. (2002). Topic shift devices in Thai conversation. Master Thesis, M.A. in Arts, Chulalongkorn University, Thailand. (In Thai)
Tannen, D. (1984/2005). Conversational style: Analyzing talk among friends. New York: Oxford University Press.
Tannen, D. (1994). Gender and Discourse. New York: Oxford University Press.
The Royal Institute. (2014). Photchananukrom Sap Phasasat (Phasasat Prayuk). [Linguistic Dictionary (Applied Linguistic)]. Bangkok: The Royal Institute. (In Thai)
Ueno, K. (2012). Role interaction in a vertical relationship: An analysis of questions in Japanese teacher-student conversations. In Language and the city, Sociolinguistics Symposium 19, August 21-24, 2012. Freie Universität Berlin, Germany.
Vatcharasuwan, P. (2004). The act of disagreeing in Thai by speakers of different social status : The case of teachers and students. Master Thesis, M.A. in Arts, Chulalongkorn University, Thailand. (In Thai)
Wannaprasert, C. (1979). Sangkhom Thai. [Thai society]. Pattani: Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Prince of Songkla University, Pattani Campus. (In Thai)
West, C. & Garcia, A. (1988). Conversational shift work: A study of topical transitions between women and men. Social Problems, 35, 551-575.
Zimmerman, D.H. & West, C. (1975). Sex Roles, Interruptions and Silences in Conversation. In Thorne, B., and Henley, N. (Eds.), Language and Sex: Difference and Dominance, pp. 105-129, Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House Publishers.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Journal of Arts and Thai Studies
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
