A survey of strategies in formulating speaking ideas among english major students at thu dau mot university m a 60 14 10

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY – HO CHI MINH CITY
UNIVERSITY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES AND HUMANITIES
FACULTY OF ENGLISH LINGUISTICS AND LITERATURE

A SURVEY OF STRATEGIES
IN FORMULATING SPEAKING IDEAS
AMONG ENGLISH MAJOR STUDENTS
AT THU DAU MOT UNIVERSITY

A thesis submitted to the
Faculty of English Linguistics and Literature
in partial fulfillment of the Master‟s degree in TESOL

By
QUACH YEN LINH

Supervised by
LE HOANG DUNG, PH.D

HO CHI MINH CITY, July 2017


STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP
I hereby declare this thesis entitled “A SURVEY OF STRATEGIES IN
FORMULATING SPEAKING IDEAS AMONG ENGLISH MAJOR
STUDENTS AT THU DAU MOT UNIVERSITY” is the result of my own work
except as cited in the references.
The thesis has not been accepted for any degree and it is not currently submitted in
candidature of any other degree.
Ho Chi Minh City, July 2017

Signature: _________________
Name: QUACH YEN LINH

i


RETENTION AND USE OF THE THESIS
I hereby state that I, QUACH YEN LINH, being the candidate for the degree of
Master in TESOL, accept the requirements of the University relating to the
retention and use of Master‟s Theses deposited in the Library.
In terms of these conditions, I agree that the origin copy of my thesis deposited in
the Library should be accessible for purposes of study and research in accordance
with the normal conditions established by the Library for the care, loan and
reproduction of theses.
Ho Chi Minh City, July 2017

Signature: _________________
Name: QUACH YEN LINH

ii


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First and foremost, I am deeply indebted to my supervisor, Dr. Le Hoang Dung,
for his invaluable guidance and support during the preparation and completion of
this thesis. Without his wholehearted assistance throughout the research, I would
not have finished this thesis successfully.
Secondly, I would like to express my deep gratitude to all my teachers in my
postgraduate program for their dedication and useful instructions through my time
as a master student.

Thirdly, I am obliged to my colleagues and students at Thu Dau Mot University
for their precious time in providing data for the study. This thesis would not have
been completed if it had not been for their sincere cooperation.
Fourthly, my special thanks are extended to my fellow master students – TESOL
2013 class – who are my good friends as well as good colleagues. I highly
appreciate the understanding and knowledge they shared with me during the
course.
Fifthly, I would like to express my appreciation to the English Resource Center
(ERC) of the Faculty of English Linguistics and Literature for helping me access
to valuable sources of materials for the research.
Last but not least, my heartfelt gratitude are reserved for my parents and sisters
who have always supported and encouraged me, especially in my gloomy days.
Their unconditional care and continuous encouragement motivated me to burst
with full energy and effort.

iii


ABSTRACT
Difficulties in speaking have become major concerns for teachers and learners.
However, main focuses of research papers are commonly given to grammar,
vocabulary and pronunciation which are considered as students‟ main problems,
resulting in disregard for other elements, especially formulating speaking ideas.
This is really challenging for students to finish a speaking task successfully with
no ideas or opinions to express.
This study, therefore, surveyed the strategies in formulating speaking ideas among
English major students at Thu Dau Mot University (TDMU). It analyzed the
causes to difficulties, the strategies in formulating speaking ideas as well as
offering some suggestions for students and teachers. The study employed nonexperimental design and its data were collected via means of (a) questionnaire to
116 second-year students of English major, (b) interview with 6 teachers and 18

students, and (c) think-aloud protocol to 8 students. The analysis was carried out
by measures of counting frequency, calculating percentage, and interpreting
comments from the respondents.
The findings of the study indicated that all of the student respondents did
encounter difficulties in formulating speaking ideas due to a number of major
causes such as lack of vocabulary, no background of knowledge, lack of
confidence and lack of time to prepare ideas. This paper provided useful strategies
for students to overcome difficulties in formulating speaking ideas. The results,
although tentative, give a better understanding of the reality of using strategies in
formulating speaking ideas at TDMU and offer suggestions for both teachers and
learners in this institution. The thesis closes by identifying some ideas for further
research in relation to this study.

iv


TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP ...................................................................................... i
RETENTION AND USE OF THE THESIS .......................................................................ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................iii
ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................................ iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS ..................................................................................................... v
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................................. ix
LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................. x
LIST OF TABLES .............................................................................................................. xi
CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION ................................................................................. 1

1.1.

Background to the study ........................................................................ 1

1.2.

Aims of the study ................................................................................... 6

1.3.

Research questions ................................................................................. 6

1.4.

Significance of the study........................................................................ 7

1.5.

Scope of the study .................................................................................. 7

1.6.

Structure of the thesis............................................................................. 7

CHAPTER II
2.1.

LITERATURE REVIEW ...................................................................... 8
Speaking skill ......................................................................................... 8

2.1.1. The nature of the speaking skill ............................................................. 8
2.1.2. Importance of the speaking skill in EFL classrooms ............................. 9
2.1.3. Functions of speaking ............................................................................ 9
2.1.4. The speaking process ........................................................................... 12
2.1.5. What speakers need to know................................................................ 13
2.2.

Problems with speaking activities ........................................................ 15

2.3.

Factors influencing EFL learners‟ speaking skill ................................ 17

2.4.

Characteristics of a successful speaking activity ................................. 18
v


2.5.

The roles of the teacher in a speaking activity..................................... 20

2.6.

Teaching methodology of the speaking skill ....................................... 21
2.6.1. A basic methodological model for teaching speaking ......................... 21
2.6.2. Other models of teaching speaking ...................................................... 22

2.7.

Formulating speaking ideas ................................................................. 24
2.7.1. Pre-speaking activities ......................................................................... 24
2.7.2. Strategies in formulating speaking ideas ............................................. 26
2.7.2.1.

Planning strategies ......................................................................... 26

2.7.2.2.

Brainstorming strategies ................................................................ 28

2.8.

Related local studies ............................................................................ 33

2.9.

Conceptual framework of the study ..................................................... 35

2.10.

Summary .............................................................................................. 38

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY .............................................................................. 39

3.1.

Research design ................................................................................... 39

3.2.

Research site ........................................................................................ 39

3.3.

Participants ........................................................................................... 39
3.3.1. Students‟ profile ................................................................................... 39
3.3.2. Teacher respondents‟ profile................................................................ 42

3.4.

Research instruments ........................................................................... 42
3.4.1. Questionnaire ....................................................................................... 43
3.4.2. Interview .............................................................................................. 44
3.4.3. Think-aloud protocol ........................................................................... 45
3.4.4. Summary of the research instruments .................................................. 46

3.5.

Data collection procedures ................................................................... 48
3.5.1. Procedures for distributing the questionnaire ...................................... 48
3.5.2. Procedures for conducting the interview ............................................. 48
3.5.3. Procedures for conducting the think-aloud protocol ............................ 49
vi


3.6.

Data analysis procedures...................................................................... 50

3.7.

Summary .............................................................................................. 50

CHAPTER IV
4.1.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ......................................................... 51
Data analysis ........................................................................................ 51

4.1.1. Analysis of data collected from the questionnaire to students‟
respondents .................................................................................... 51
4.1.1.1.

Difficulties encountered by students‟ respondents in formulating
speaking ideas among second-year students at Thu Dau Mot
university........................................................................................ 51

4.1.1.2.

Causes to difficulties in formulating speaking ideas among secondyear students at Thu Dau Mot university ....................................... 53

4.1.1.3.

Strategies in formulating speaking ideas used by second-year
students at Thu Dau Mot University .............................................. 54

4.1.1.4.

Summary ........................................................................................ 57

4.1.2. Analysis of data from the interviews ................................................... 58
4.1.2.1.

Data analysis from the interviews with student respondents ......... 58

4.1.2.2.

Data analysis from the interviews with teacher respondents ......... 67

4.1.3. Analysis of data from the think-aloud protocols.................................. 71
4.2.

Discussion of results ............................................................................ 75
4.2.1. Causes to difficulties in formulating speaking ideas .......................... 75
4.2.2. Strategies in formulating speaking ideas ............................................. 76
4.2.3. Pedagogical implications for teachers and solutions for students ....... 78
4.2.3.1.

Pedagogical implications for teachers ........................................... 78

4.2.3.2.

Solutions for students..................................................................... 80

4.3.

Major findings ...................................................................................... 84

4.4.

Summary .............................................................................................. 87

CHAPTER V
5.1.

CONCLUSION .................................................................................... 88
Conclusion ........................................................................................... 88
vii


5.1.1. Causes to difficulties in formulating speaking ideas .......................... 88
5.1.2. Strategies in formulating speaking ideas ............................................. 90
5.2.

Suggestions .......................................................................................... 91
5.2.1. Suggestions for teachers ...................................................................... 91
5.2.2. Suggestions for learners ....................................................................... 93

5.3.

Limitations of the study ....................................................................... 93

5.4.

Recommendations for further study..................................................... 94

5.5.

Summary .............................................................................................. 95

REFERENCES .................................................................................................................. 96
APPENDIX A: QUESTIONNAIRE................................................................................ 102
APPENDIX B: INTERVIEW (FOR TEACHERS) ......................................................... 105
APPENDIX C: INTERVIEW (FOR STUDENTS) ......................................................... 106
APPENDIX D: THINK-ALOUD PROTOCOL .............................................................. 107
APPENDIX E: LETTER TO TEACHER RESPONDENTS .......................................... 110
APPENDIX F: LETTER TO STUDENT RESPONDENTS ........................................... 111
APPENDIX G: LETTER TO ADMINISTRATOR ........................................................ 112

viii


LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
EFL: English as a Foreign Language
TDMU: Thu Dau Mot University
L2: Second Language
ELT: English Language Teaching

ix


LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: A basic model for teaching productive skills suggested by Harmer (2007) ....... 21
Figure 2: Frequency of difficulties in formulating speaking ideas encountered by students
............................................................................................................................................ 52

x


LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Some taxonomies of language learning strategies ................................................. 2
Table 2: Taxonomies of communication strategies as cited in Dornyei & Scott (1997), pp.
196-197 .............................................................................................................. 3
Table 3: Strategies in brainstorming suggested by Cullen (1998) ..................................... 32
Table 4: Strategies in formulating speaking ideas from Cohen et al. (1996) and Cullen
(1998) ............................................................................................................... 36
Table 5: A compiled list of strategies of formulating speaking ideas as the conceptual
framework ........................................................................................................ 37
Table 6: Number of classes and students in the Faculty of Foreign Languages ................ 40
Table 7: Demographic characteristics of student respondents .......................................... 41
Table 8: Demographic characteristics of teacher respondents ........................................... 42
Table 9: A summary of the research tools ......................................................................... 47
Table 10: Causes to difficulties in students‟ formulating speaking ideas .......................... 53
Table 11: Strategies in formulating speaking ideas used by second-year students at Thu
Dau Mot University ......................................................................................... 55
Table 12: How students have the strategies in formulating speaking ideas ...................... 56
Table 13: How teachers can help students overcome difficulties in formulating speaking
ideas ................................................................................................................. 63
Table 14: Causes to difficulties in formulating speaking ideas through the think-aloud
protocols ........................................................................................................... 72
Table 15: Strategies in formulating speaking ideas as reported in the think-aloud protocols
.......................................................................................................................... 73
Table 16: Pedagogical implications for teachers in formulating speaking ideas ............... 78
xi

Table 17: Solutions for students in formulating speaking ideas ........................................ 81
Table 18: A summary of causes to difficulties in formulating speaking ideas from the
study‟s results................................................................................................... 89
Table 19: A summary of strategies in formulating speaking ideas from the study‟s results
.......................................................................................................................... 90

xii


CHAPTER I
1.1.

INTRODUCTION

Background to the study

Speaking is one of the two productive skills which many learners of English find
difficult to master. The researcher of this current study, as a lecturer at Thu Dau
Mot University (TDMU), has observed that speaking skill brings up many weighty
matters to English learners as well as EFL teachers. At TDMU, both teachers and
learners tend to make every effort to primarily enhance grammar, vocabulary and
pronunciation for students‟ perfect speaking skill by feeding more grammar and
vocabulary (idioms, useful phrases), and drilling their pronunciation.
Theories and experiments have proved that the causes of the difficulty are
because of the lack of grammar, vocabulary, confidence, etc. The purpose of
speaking is primarily to achieve effective communication. In order to
communicate well, learners are usually advised to use language learning strategies
which are the so-called speaking strategies and communication strategies.
As reported by Anderson (2005), serious concentration on the significance
of language learning strategies have been increasing since the mid-1970s and

1980s. It is evident that language learning strategies have been researched and
classified by many theorists, such as O‟Malley et al. (1985), Rubin (1987), Oxford
(1990), Stern (1992), Anderson (2005) and Zhang (2006).

1


No.

Name of
researcher

Taxonomy of language learning strategies

1

O‟Malley et al. Metacognitive strategies, Cognitive strategies, Socio(1985)
affective strategies

2

Rubin (1987)

Learning strategies (including Cognitive strategies and
Metacognitive strategies), Communication strategies,
Social strategies

3

Oxford (1990)

Direct strategies (including Memory strategies,
Cognitive strategies, Compensation strategies, and
Communication strategies), Indirect strategies (including
Metacognitive strategies, Affective strategies, and Social
strategies

4

Stern (1992)

Management and planning strategies, Cognitive
strategies, Communicative – Experiential strategies,
Interpersonal strategies, and Affective strategies

5

Anderson (2005)

Memorization strategies, Clarification strategies,
Communication strategies, Monitoring strategies, and
Prior knowledge strategies

6

Zhang &
(2006)

Goh Use-focused
learning

strategies,
Form-focused
learning strategies, Comprehension strategies, and
Communication strategies

Table 1: Some taxonomies of language learning strategies
However, “most of them come up with more or less the same classification,”
Razmjoo & Ardekani (2011) concluded, and they “represent very general language
learning strategies.” There are hardly any taxonomies which barely target
strategies for speaking skill, especially how to formulate speaking ideas. Oxford
(1990) compiled a table of “Strategy applications listed according to each of the
four language skills,” which has become “the most widely used inventory for L2
strategy research” (Anderson, 2005, p.760) but it also failed to explore the ways to
obtain speaking ideas nevertheless.
Communication strategies are, according to Corder (1981), “a systematic
technique employed by a speaker to express his [or her] meaning when faced with

2


some difficulty.” Stern (1983) also shared the same point of view towards the
definition of communication strategies which are defined as the “techniques of
coping with difficulties in communicating in an imperfectly known second
language.” Communication strategies, nevertheless, have been used by Oxford
(1990) “in a very restricted sense, referring to strategies which compensate for
missing knowledge only during conversational speech production.” To outline the
history of communication strategies, Dornyei & Scott (1997) summarized nine
taxonomies of communication strategies, as follows:

No.

Name of
researcher

Taxonomy of communication strategies

1

Tarone (1977)

Avoidance, Paraphrase, Conscious transfer, Appeal
for assistance, and Mime

2

Faerch & Kasper Formal reduction, Functional
(1983b)
Achievement strategies

3

Bialystok (1983)

L1-based strategies, L2-based strategies, and Nonlinguistic strategies

4

Paribakht (1985)

Linguistic

approach,
Contextual
Conceptual strategies, and Mime

5

Willems (1987)

Reduction strategies, and Achievement strategies

6

Bialystok (1990)

Analysis-based
strategies

7

Nijmegen Group

Conceptual strategies and Linguistic/ Code strategies

8

Poulisse (1983)

Substitution strategies, Substitution plus strategies,
and Reconceptualization strategies

9

Dornyei & Scott Direct strategies, Interactional strategies, and Indirect
(1995a, 1995b)
strategies

strategies

and

reduction,

and

approach,

Control-based

Table 2: Taxonomies of communication strategies as cited in Dornyei & Scott
(1997), pp. 196-197

3


The review article of Faerch & Kasper (1983b) aimed at examining trends
in second language communication strategies. Many other researchers in second
language acquisition have also expressed their interest in communication strategies.
Teng (2011) examined the communication strategy use of 318 EFL college
students with three research instruments consisting of a role-play task, a
communication strategy questionnaire and an interview. This study showed that

the most frequently used strategy was using familiar words. This may also be a
possible suggestion to help the learners gain fluency in formulating ideas quickly
in speaking after they have practiced familiar topics that bring them speaking ideas.
Cervantes and Rodriguez (2012) presented in their study results that EFL
teachers would not use or teach communication strategies to their students. They
switched to their first language or abandoned the message “to avoid
communication problems.” Results of the study revealed that the most frequently
used strategies were language switch, clarification request, comprehension check,
and asking for confirmation. One of their recommendations was that students
should go to classes regularly in order to acquire more topical knowledge and take
more practice in speaking skill.
Ugla, Adnan, and Abidin (2013) investigated the use of communication
strategies by Iraqi EFL students. The study indicated

the significance of

incorporating communication strategies into English learning programs to improve
the students‟ communicative competence. Because of their “lack of grammatical
competence,” EFL students used communication strategy as a tool to help
communicate effectively.
Another study on the use of communication strategies came from Yaman,
Irgin, and Kavasoglu (2013). Their study emphasized crucial differences of using
communication strategies in gender and language proficiency. The authors claimed
that there were other variables such as individual differences, background
knowledge

and

motivation

which

needed

communication strategies.
4

considering

in

identifying


So far, a number of interested studies have been presented, however, most
of the studies take account of general issues and/ or only focus on grammar,
vocabulary, or confidence. Going back to the context of Vietnam, in my
observation throughout the teaching years, if EFL learners are asked about the
reasons why they cannot speak English, there is a high chance of another factor
that causes their difficulties in speaking English. EFL teachers may receive some
common answers like “I‟m sorry but I don‟t know what to say next” or “I have no
ideas for this topic”. Arguably, students are well equipped with the knowledge of
English grammar rules and vocabulary while they are learning at high schools or
universities, yet it is often hard for them to speak out, if they do not have any
opinions to express. In this regard, ideas, in fact, also play a significant role in
producing speech. There are, nevertheless, very few studies which pay attention to
the reasons why students have difficulties in formulating ideas when they speak
English.
In Vietnam, the education system in general and the teaching of English
used to give too much weight to teaching grammar and vocabulary over many

previous decades. Recently, for the past few years, it has given closer attention to
train and enhance learners‟ communication skills in English, especially speaking
skill, which is a big challenge for lots of students.
In the researcher‟s observation, the most common speaking problems that
English-major students at TDMU

have to face may consist of pronunciation

mistakes, grammar errors, vocabulary misuse, lack of coherence, lack of fluency
and lack of speaking ideas. Since each key problem indicates smaller ones, it is
very demanding indeed for both teachers and learners to tackle all. For instance, to
correct students‟ pronunciation mistakes, the teachers have to deal with every
single minor one such as lacking final sounds in each word, difficulty in producing
consonant clusters or unnatural intonation. Hence, it really takes a great deal of
time to sort out, let us say, only two of those key problems which definitely entail
many subsequent ones.

5


It seems widely assumed, even among the scholars and teachers of English,
that once students have good grammar, vocabulary and pronunciation, they will
definitely achieve high speaking scores. When asked about the common speaking
problems, the teachers only mention those three ones. Thus, teachers in charge of
speaking courses give very little consideration for other factors including
formulating speaking ideas, which also causes noteworthy difficulties for students
to perform their speaking tasks well. Nevertheless, fewer local studies have
addressed the difficulties in formulating speaking ideas. So far the discussion has
led the study to a real need to better understand the real causes behind the
difficulties encountered by students. It is most likely that formulating ideas in

speaking is of crucial importance here and therefore needs further investigation.
1.2.

Aims of the study

Related to the argument and discussion above, the study, therefore, aims to (1)
examine the reasons why the second-year students of English major at TDMU
encounter those difficulties and (2) investigate what strategies the students employ
when they have difficulties in formulating speaking ideas
1.3.

Research questions

In order to achieve the two major aims of study above, this research attempts to
answer two major research questions as follows:
(1) Why do the second year students of English major at Thu Dau Mot
University encounter difficulties in formulating speaking ideas?
(2) What strategies are frequently employed by the second year students of
English major at Thu Dau Mot University when they encounter difficulties
in formulating speaking ideas?
Based on answers to the two research questions, the study may then offer
some suggestions for students and teachers to overcome the difficulties,
particularly related to formulating speaking ideas.

6


1.4.

Significance of the study

It is hoped that the findings of the study will shed some light on the effective
strategies of the students to make a contribution to the field of language teaching.
Furthermore, some practical solutions will be offered to teachers and students for
how they should deal with the found difficulties, especially in formulating
speaking ideas.
1.5.

Scope of the study

Since there are different groups of students taking undergraduate courses at
TDMU, the study, within the time limit and the scope of a master‟s thesis,
therefore is conducted on the sophomores of English majors. Within the scope of
this study, the research data, would be taken only from the second year students of
English major classes in the Faculty of Foreign Languages at TDMU, who have
been taking at least four courses of English speaking skills. It is noted that, given
the research aims, the study did not aim to carry out any experiments during the
research process
1.6.

Structure of the thesis

The thesis report is divided into five chapters. Chapter One

introduces

the

background to the study and states the purpose, significance and limitation
of

the

study. Chapter Two provides the relevant literature on the speaking

difficulties of the English major students and the learners‟ strategies. Chapter
Three presents the research methodology of the study. Chapter Four analyzes the
data and discusses the results. Chapter Five summarizes the findings, draws
conclusion, and offers recommendations for further research.

7


CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter explores and presents a number of academic work related to the focus
of the study mainly related to speaking skill in EFL classrooms, problems with
speaking activities, different strategies, formulating speaking ideas, and so on.
Finally, the framework of the study is also conceptualized in this chapter.
2.1.

Speaking skill

2.1.1. The nature of the speaking skill
Bygate (1987) stated that it is necessary to distinguish between “knowledge” and
“skill”. By giving “speaking practice” and “oral exam” to EFL learners, it enables
to see the difference between “knowledge” and “skill”, which is considerable in
teaching speaking. While the “knowledge” consists of a basic set of vocabulary,
pronunciation, and grammar rules, the “skill” refers to the learners‟ ability to use
them.
According to Bailey (2003), speaking skill is more difficult than the other

three skills. The first difficulty is that the speaker does not have much time to think
before producing the verbal utterance. In other words, speaking requires immediate
feedback. Hence, the speaker usually feels that the hearer is waiting for the speech
from the speaker right then. The second issue is that the utterance cannot be edited
or revised like writing. This makes the speaker sometimes feel embarrassed
because of the speech.
In another research, Luoma (2004) suggested some of the following
characteristics of speaking (as cited in Richards, 2008, p.19):
 Composed of idea units (conjoined short phrases and clauses)
 May be planned (e.g., a lecture) or unplanned (e.g., a conversation)
 Employs more vague or generic words than written language
 Employs fixed phrases, fillers, and hesitation markers
 Contains slips and errors reflecting online processing
 Involves reciprocity (i.e., interactions are jointly constructed)
8


 Shows variation (e.g., between formal and casual speech), reflecting
speaker roles, speaking purpose, and the context
In general, speaking a foreign language requires a lot of effort from the
students since this is one of the most significant skill which can reflect how
learners apply the language they have learned.
2.1.2. Importance of the speaking skill in EFL classrooms
As speaking is one of the most effective way to communicate successfully, an
average person, according to Thornbury (2005), can produce “tens of thousands of
words a day.” Harmer (2007) summarized three main reasons why English is
significant to be taught in EFL classrooms. The first advantage of speaking is to let
students have “rehearsal opportunities” which help them practice “real-life
speaking in the safety of the classroom.” Another strength is that speaking tasks
can “provide feedback for teacher and students,” thus the feedback will indicate

how much progress the students have made and whether there are still other
language problems to solve for the students. The last benefit is to help students
become autonomous in their learning; hence, they can use the language items
“fluently without very much conscious thought.”
When learners have good competence of speaking skill, they will feel
confident about their English. This is both a target for every EFL learner and
motivation to make more effort in studying a foreign language.
2.1.3. Functions of speaking
Speaking is important for students to learn due to its several crucial functions.
Based on the version of Brown and Yule‟s framework of the functions of speaking,
Richards (2008) offered three main functions with features involved sub-skills and
clear examples as follows:

9


2.1.3.1.

Talk as interaction

This simply refers to social exchanges such as greeting, small talks, and recent
experiences. “The focus is more on the speakers and how they wish to present
themselves to each other than on the message.” According to Richard, talk as
interaction:
 Has a primarily social function
 Reflects role relationships
 Reflects speaker‟s identity
 Maybe formal or casual
 Uses conversational conventions
 Reflects degrees of politeness

 Employs many generic words
 Uses conversational register
 Is jointly constructed
Here are some common examples. For instance, two women are asking a
third woman about her husband and how they first met, chatting to a school friend
over coffee, telling a friend about an amusing weekend experience, etc. He also
illustrated some skills involved in this function, such as opening and closing
conversations, choosing topics, making small-talk, joking, recounting personal
incidents and experiences, turn-taking, using adjacency pairs, interrupting, reacting
to others, and using an appropriate style of speaking.
Richards also claimed that students would feel difficulty in “presenting a
good image of themselves and sometimes avoid situations that call for this kind of
talk.” Thus, Hatch (1978) reported that students can get by on familiar topics and
then practice new topics. (as cited in Richards, 2008, p.24)
2.1.3.2.

Talk as transaction

Unlike talk as interaction, talk as transaction focuses on what is said or done and
not the participants. Talk as transaction has several main features:
10


 It has a primarily information focus.
 The main focus is on the message and not the participants.
 Participants employ communication strategies to make themselves
understood.
 There may be frequent questions, repetitions, and comprehension checks.
 There may be negotiation and digression.
 Linguistic accuracy is not always important.

Some common examples can be found such as group discussion, problem
solving activities, making a phone call to obtain some information, asking for
directions, buying things, ordering, etc. Skills involved in this kind of talk can be
explaining a need or intention, describing something, asking questions, asking for
clarification, confirming information, justifying an opinion, making suggestions,
clarifying understanding, making comparisons, and finally agreeing and
disagreeing.
Richards also emphasized that linguistic accuracy might be not important
and priority should be given to successful communication. In this function, it is
necessary for participants to employ communication strategies to have each other‟s
comprehension.
2.1.3.3.

Talk as performance

The last type can be considered as public talk, in other words public speaking. Talk
as performance, which is normally in the form of monolog and follows a
recognizable format, requires the speakers to make and deliver a speech in front of
an audience. Common examples of talk as performance can be found as giving a
class report, conducting a class debate, giving a speech of welcome, making a sales
presentation, giving a lecture, etc. According to Richards, talk as performance, in
order to meet its purpose and goal, has to comprise the following features:
 A focus on both message and audience
 Predictable organization and sequencing

11


 Importance of both form and accuracy
 Language is more like written language

 Often monologic
Due to these features, talk as performance requires some essential skills,
such as using an appropriate format, presenting information in an appropriate
sequence, maintaining audience engagement, using correct pronunciation and
grammar, creating an effect on the audience, using appropriate vocabulary, and
using an appropriate opening and closing.
Talk as performance focuses on both form and accuracy, both message and
audience. It is closer to written language than spoken language and organized in
formal style. Unlike talk as interaction and transaction, talk as performance is
judged by its impact on the audience.
In sum, speaking can serve three main functions: “talk as interaction”, “talk
as transaction”, and “talk as performance”. “Talk as interaction” brings the focus
into the speakers within the form of social conversations such as chatting or
greeting, whereas “talk as transaction” refers to the message and comprehension
such as discussion or suggestion. “Talk as performance” seems to require more
effort because it draws the focus on both audience and message and it follows a
certain format such as a lecture, a presentation, or a speech of welcome.
2.1.4. The speaking process
It is usually not common for people to think about the process of producing speech.
According to Levelt (1994), speaking consists of three levels at least. Level of
intentions and ideas, level of words and sentences, and level of sound and
production or articulation have their own characteristic speeds of operation.
In another research, Thornbury (2005) claimed that there are at least three
stages, in other words three stages in the speaking process. The first stage is
“conceptualization” which allows speaker to conceptualize the story in terms of
discourse type (is it a story?), its topic (is it about sport?), and its purpose of
12