A Contrastive Study of Elicitation Questions in English and Persian Modern Plays

Table of Contents

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

1.1. Preliminaries

1.2. Objectives of the Study

1.3. Significance of the Study

1.4. Scope of the Study

1.5. Outline of the Study

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1. Introduction

2.2. Pragmatics

2.2.1. Definition

2.2.2. Speech Acts

2.2.3. Speech Events

2.3. Description of Conversation

2.3.1. Approaches to the Description of Conversation

2.3.1. Discourse Analysis

2.3.2.1. Characterization of Discourse

2.3.2.2. Text

2.3.2.3. Context

2.3.3. Conversational Analysis

2.3.3.1. Conversational Descriptive Units

2.3.3.1.1. Turn, Pair, Sequence

2.3.3.1.2. Act, Move, Exchange

2.3.3.2. Conversational Structure

2.3.3.2.1 Adjacency Pair

2.3.3.2.2. Three-part Exchange

2.3.3.2.3. Move Structure

2.3.3.3. Conversational Functions

2.3.3.3.1. Structural Location

2.3.3.3.2. Prospective Classification

2.3.3.3.3. Retrospective Classification

2.3.3.3.4. Conversational Process

2.4. Question

2.4.1. Quirk, et al.’s Classification of Questions

2.4.2. Questions as Illocutionary Acts

2.4.3. Questions as Requests

2.4.4. Tsui’s Classification of Questions

2.4.4.1. Responses to Elicitations

2.4.4.2. Follow-up Acts

2.5. Some Related Studies

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY

3.1. Introduction

3.2. Definition of Key Terms

3.3. The Corpus

3.4. Analysis of the Data

3.5. Processing and Presentation of the Results

CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1. Introduction

4.2. Results

4.3. Discussion

CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS

5.1. Introduction

5.2. Summary

5.3. Conclusions

5.4. Theoretical and Pedagogical Implications

5.5. Suggestions for Further Research

Research Objectives and Key Topics

This thesis investigates the discourse functions of elicitation questions by verifying the applicability of Tsui's (1995) model within modern English and Persian plays. The study aims to contrast how different subcategories of elicitation questions are utilized and distributed in both languages to understand their role in conversational interaction.

• Contrastive analysis of elicitation question subcategories (inform, agree, commit, repeat, clarify).
• Application of Tsui's (1995) conversational analysis model to modern plays.
• Frequency and distribution analysis of questions in English and Persian literary texts.
• Investigation of the pedagogical and theoretical implications of question usage in discourse.
• Statistical significance testing (Chi-square) of question types across languages.

Excerpt from the Book

Summary of Chapters

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION: This chapter introduces the importance of questioning in language learning and provides the background for the research on conversational discourse and elicitation.

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW: This chapter surveys theories on pragmatics, speech acts, conversational structure, and the classification of questions according to various researchers.

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY: This section defines the key terms, describes the corpus of modern English and Persian plays, and details the data analysis and processing procedures.

CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: This chapter presents the statistical results of the question frequency analysis in English and Persian and discusses the findings.

CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS: This final chapter summarizes the study, draws conclusions based on the findings, and provides pedagogical implications for language instruction.

Key Words

Elicitation questions, Discourse analysis, Conversational analysis, Pragmatics, Tsui’s model, Modern plays, English, Persian, Contrastive study, Speech acts, Frequency analysis, Pedagogy, Interactional discourse, Communicative competence, Language learning.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the primary focus of this thesis?

The thesis focuses on a contrastive study of 'Elicitation questions' in modern English and Persian plays, analyzing how these questions function within discourse based on Tsui's (1995) model.

What are the central thematic fields covered in this work?

The work covers pragmatics, conversational analysis, the classification of questions as illocutionary acts, and the structural organization of dialogue in literary genres.

What is the main research question of this study?

The study primarily seeks to verify the applicability and universality of Tsui's (1995) model of conversational structure to both English and Persian, while determining the frequency of different elicitation subcategories in both languages.

Which scientific methods were applied?

The research uses a contrastive corpus-based approach, analyzing 361 English and 337 Persian instances of elicitation. Statistical analysis includes Chi-square tests to determine the significance of differences between question types.

What does the main body of the work treat?

The main body examines literature on discourse analysis, defines key terms like 'elicit: inform' or 'elicit: commit', and provides a detailed analysis of the gathered data from specific modern plays.

Which keywords characterize the research?

Key terms include Elicitation questions, Discourse analysis, Pragmatics, Conversational structure, and Contrastive study.

Why are modern plays used as the primary corpus for this study?

The author chose modern plays because the language used in them is spontaneous and closely mirrors natural, everyday conversations, making them ideal for conversational analysis.

How do 'Elicit: Inform' and 'Elicit: Clarify' compare across languages in this study?

The study found that both English and Persian texts used these two subcategories most frequently, with 'Elicit: Inform' being the highest in both, though there were statistically significant variations in the frequency of other types like 'Elicit: Agree' and 'Elicit: Repeat'.

What conclusion does the author draw regarding follow-up acts?

The author concludes that follow-up moves are often absent in written texts or scenarios where participants know each other very well, and that such acts may also be realized non-verbally.

What pedagogical suggestion does the author make?

The author suggests that teachers and curriculum designers should incorporate function-based models of elicitation into language courses to help learners move beyond using simple requestive forms and improve their communicative competence.