Carlo Cinaglia,Saint Joseph's University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA

Why are conversational strategies important for second language (L2) speakers? Sociolinguistics and pragmatics research highlights the importance and social function of small talk and conversational routines for L2 speakers of English. For instance, the effective use of conversational strategies can develop interpersonal relations between speakers as well as enable or hinder an individual’s ability to participate in a group function and to be recognized as a legitimate participant in conversation (Coupland, 2003; Holmes, 2005). Conversational routines are, therefore, an essential skill to develop for ESL learners.

One particular conversational routine important for L2 speakers is how to close conversations. Considering Levinson’s (1983) analysis of closing sequences in conversation, Wong & Waring (2010) note that closings are an important routine because they can include or exclude new topics in a conversation and influence the relationship between speakers. What’s more, conversational closings can be performed by using a variety of different strategies, presenting an additional challenge for L2 speakers. Some examples of these possible strategies, adapted from Wong & Waring (2010), are making future plans (e.g., “Let’s catch up again soon”), expressing gratitude (e.g., “Thanks for meeting with me”), explaining the reason for talking (e.g., “I just wanted to see how you were doing”), referring back to a topic in the conversation (e.g., “Well it sounds like things are going well with your new job”), expressing well wishes (e.g., “I hope your presentation goes well later”), and explicitly announcing the closing (e.g., “I should get going”), among others. Given the many potential shapes a closing strategy might take, conversational closings could be challenging sequences for learners to recognize and respond to appropriately.

Teaching Conversational Strategies and Closings

Can the art of conversation actually be taught? (Yes!) Small talk and conversational routines have been observed as consisting of systematic and formulaic language, making conversation an ideal language focus for the classroom (Coupland, 2003; Holmes, 2005; Ishihara & Cohen, 2010; Wong & Waring, 2010). Wong and Waring (2010) propose a conversation analytic-informed approach to teaching conversational routines and patterns to ESL learners, suggesting that a lack of awareness of certain patterns—like turn taking and maintaining or closing conversations—could lead to breakdown or discomfort when interacting with others. Ishihara and Cohen (2010) note an inconsistency between intuited textbook dialogues and actual language use, suggesting that ESL teachers seek alternative examples of language use to develop learners’ pragmatic awareness. Such sources include in-class discourse completion activities and field observations of naturally occurring language to raise learners’ awareness of pragmatic norms and variation. Both Ishihara and Cohen (2010) and Wong and Waring (2010) suggest allowing students to be language analysts by exposing them to authentic language in use.

A similar approach to teaching pragmatic routines is proposed by Martínez-Flor and Usó-Juan (2006), consisting of six stages: (1) research, (2) reflect, (3) receive, (4) reason, (5) rehearse, and (6) revise. Stage 1 (research) entails students collecting their own data about a particular language feature. Stages 2 (reflect) and 3 (research) involve students first analyzing their own language data and then following teacher-led instruction related to the language feature. Stages 4 (reason) and 5 (rehearse) have students first doing activities thinking about the target language feature and later engaging in activities actually using the target feature. Stage 6 (revise) involves students using teacher-provided feedback to adjust their use of the target feature. The 6 Rs approach allows for hands-on observation and experimentation with language as well as reflection and discussion about language use and variation.

Lesson Outline

The following lesson consists of a sequence of activities that focus on conversational closings. The structure of the lesson seeks to partly mirror the 6 Rs approach proposed by Martínez-Flor & Usó-Juan (2006) as well as incorporate certain activities suggested by Wong and Waring (2010) and Ishihara and Cohen (2010).

1. Discussion Questions

Students first discuss ideas and prior experiences related to closing conversations. Potential discussion questions:

• When you want to end a conversation, what do you do?
• Can you list some words people use when they close a conversation?
• Do you ever think finishing a conversation is awkward or difficult? Why?
• Have you ever misunderstood or not recognized when someone else tried to end a conversation with you?

(questions adapted from Wong & Waring, 2010)

2. Observation (Outside of Class) [R1: Research]

An observation exercise is completed as an out-of-class activity or for homework. Students observe multiple conversations and pay attention to what each speaker does to bring each conversation to a close, including specific words used and/or body language. Observation notes can be collected as homework.

3. Discussion and Analysis of Data [R2: Reflect]

In the next class, students work in groups to compare their observation notes, sharing one or two interesting points and making lists of any patterns they observe or frequent words or expressions used in their data. The purpose of this activity is for students to discuss and make sense of their data among themselves.

4. Teacher-Led Dialogue Analysis [R3: Receive]

After students discuss their own observation notes and findings, they examine transcripts of conversations provided by the teacher and identify when and how closings occur in each conversation. Students first analyze each transcript among themselves, and then the teacher highlights closing strategies used in each example. (Sample transcripts of closing sequences can be found in Wong & Waring, 2010.) This activity aims to introduce students to another perspective toward conversational closings and allow them to compare their analysis with the teacher’s analysis.

5. Practice Activities (Controlled) [R4: Reason]

Real or fake: Students read examples of different closings used in conversation and decide if they are authentic or inauthentic, noting signal words or phrases that inform their decision. This can take the form of a worksheet or a more interactive format, such as students moving to an area in the room to indicate their opinion. Whichever format, students then compare their ideas to discuss why particular closings seem authentic or inauthentic.

Identifying the strategy: Students read or listen to authentic closings sequences and decide what type of closing strategy each example illustrates. This can also take the form of a worksheet or a more interactive activity, such as displaying the example closing and having students compete to identify the strategy type first.

The purpose of these two activities is for students to think about conversational closings before actually using them. The rationale for starting with more controlled activities like these and moving toward less controlled activities (in the next steps) follows the sequence in the 6 Rs approach discussed earlier.

6. Practice Activities (Free) [R5: Rehearse]

Rewriting closings: With a partner, students examine a conversation with a “fake” closing and revise it to be more authentic. Students first write their responses, and then pairs act out their revised conversations to the rest of the class.

Fluency development: Each student gets a prompt card with a different closing strategy. Students have brief conversations about a specific topic. With 30 seconds’ notice, one student ends the conversation using their given closing strategy, and the other student identifies the closing strategy used.

7. Role-Play [R5: Rehearse]

Using closings in context: Students are given a scenario with roles (e.g., job interview, running into a friend at the supermarket) and act out their situation in a short conversation featuring a closing strategy.

Cocktail party (snacks encouraged!): Each student has a prompt card with a specific conversational function (e.g., give compliments, complain about everything, try to close each conversation quickly, try to keep each conversation going as long as possible). Students have a set time limit (e.g., 10 minutes) during which they talk to as many people as possible. Afterward, the teacher leads a reflection about the use of different closing strategies and (if desired) other conversational functions studied in class.

These activities aim to give students ownership of the language they are using and to provide an opportunity for creative language use, as students get into character and apply the target language features in a fun context.

8. Experiment/Survey and Report (Outside of Class) [R1: Research/R2: Reflect]

Once again, students complete an out-of-class activity exploring conversational closings further. Because closings can be difficult to observe naturally, students conduct an experiment trying out different closings strategies, or they create a survey asking for opinions about closings, following loose guidelines:

• Experiment: Practice using different types of closing strategies and pay attention to the reactions you receive. Consider the different types of responses you receive. Also consider the effectiveness of each closing strategy.
• Survey: Create a scenario/dialogue and ask different people how they would close the conversation. What different strategies do they suggest? Do you notice any patterns? Or, provide the scenario and the example closings, and ask different people for their reaction. Did they think the closings were appropriate?

Whichever format students use, they complete a written report afterward summarizing their findings and analyzing their data in relation to topics discussed throughout the lesson sequence.

References

Coupland, J. (2003). Small talk: Social functions. Research on Language and Social Interaction

36(1), 1–6.

Holmes, J. (2005). When small talk is a big deal: Sociolinguistic challenges in the workplace. In M. Long (Ed.), Second language needs analysis (pp. 344–372). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Ishihara, N., & Cohen, A. D. (2010). Teaching and learning pragmatics: Where language and culture meet. London, England: Routledge.

Martínez-Flor, A., & Usó-Juan, E. (2006). A Comprehensive pedagogical framework to develop pragmatics in the foreign language classroom: The 6Rs approach. Applied Language Learning 16(2), 39–64.

Wong, J., & Waring, H. Z. (2010). Conversation analysis and second language pedagogy: A guide for ESL/EFL teachers. New York, NY: Routledge.

Carlo Cinaglia is visiting instructor of Spanish, linguistics, and ESL at Saint Joseph’s University. He also mentors TESOL student teachers at the University of Pennsylvania’s Graduate School of Education. Previously, he was a lecturer with Penn’s English Language Programs as well as an ESL teacher in a variety of community settings throughout Philadelphia.