Term Paper

On
Compare and contrast between two types of conversation

For
Course: Eng-402

Prepared for:
Waseema Tasneen Department of English

Prepared by:
Sirajul Islam ID: 2006-2-40-017 Afrin Hia Eshita ID: 2006-1-40-009

EAST WEST UNIVERSITY

Background :
Conversational Analysis is very important component in the study of Discourse, because it tries to see how participants by interaction manage to carry the conversation: how they judge who can speak and when. Therefore, we have chosen conversation Analysis as our field of research.

Objective:
Our objective is to find out what types of language and how language is used in different settings.

Methodology:
The data we have collected for conversation Analysis is audio recorded conversations. One conversation is too formal and another is informal. In formal setting, there are only two participants, but in informal setting there are 4 participants. In record one, there are interviewer and interviewee and in record two, there are Opi Karim(host), Salauddin Lavlu, Musharraf Karim and Chanchal Chowdhury. Then we have made detailed transcription. We have compared and contrast these two conversations in terms of: Formal Links. Turn Taking. Reciprocity . Cohesion and coherence. Social background regarding usage of language.

Formal Links:
Record 1: The interviewer utters the sentence that follows parallelism. Such as-

The interviewee also uses parallelism. Such asThe interviewee uses Referring Expression to refer Boga Lake. This Referring Expression belongs to Anaphora where identity is given first. Such as-

He also uses Referring Expression to refer a boy. Such as-

The interviewee utters conjunction to add more information. Such as-

Record 2: In record two, we find conjunction. Such as- Salauddin: Mosfarrof: The host Opi Karim uses parallel sentence. Such as- . Risky Moneybag

Mosharrof uses referring expression, such as-

### So, both record one and record two have conjunction, referring expression. The host in both records uses parallelism.

Turn Taking:
Record 1: There are only two participants. One is interviewer and another is interviewee. Turn taking occurs only when interviewer asks question and interviewee starts to describe the fact. When interviewee stops, interviewer is turned to make another question. Thus each of them gives chance each other in order to carry the conversation. We also find that, interviewee takes a long time to describe his experience and the interviewer patiently waits to take the turn. She never interrupts when he was talking. She response sometimes in his conversation by saying-

Record 2: Though Opi Karim handles the conversation as a host but she provides chance so that three other participants can take the turn at any time including herself. The reason is it is an informal setting where conversation can easily be treated as gossiping or chatting. Salauddin asks Mosharaof question. Thus Mosharaof takes the turn; on the other hand Chanahal Ahowdhury was silent at that time though he was enjoying the conversation Opi Karim takes the turn when Mosharaof finishes his sentences. She now jumps to another issue regarding the acting. Finding Chanahal Ahowdhury silent, she cleverly puts forward a question both of them, i-e- Mosharaof and Chanahal. Chanahal takes the turn when Opi provides him the scope by asking the question. Though the question was asked to both of them- Mosharaof and Chanahal, but Mosharaof willingly gives the turn to Chanahal because Mosharaof has talked a lot so far. Mosharaof realizes that now the turn should go to Chanahal. Chanahal also takes the turn easily because he realizes that he should now continue the conversation. ### So, turn taking is different in these tow records. The reason is the number of participants. Complexity of the turn taking depends on the participants. Handling a conversation is largely depending on turn taking where the participants have to givewho should take the turn for speaking.

Reciprocity:
Reciprocity deals with the influence of what the receiver can do for the sake of the development of the conversation. Now, the question is who is the receiver of these records? Both the records are broadcasted in television. So, we the common people are receiver and can not influence its development. But if we think about the setting where the conversation takes place then we will find participants who can easily influence the conversation. In record one, both the interviewer and interviewee can influence the conversation though it depends on the question asked by interviewer. On the other hand, in record two all the participants influence to continue the conversation as it is an informal setting.

Cohesion and Coherence:

Record 1: The experience descried by the interviewee maintains Cohesion and Coherence. The interviewee jumps from one event to another event, but the events are linked to the question what he has been asked. He uses enough conjunction that is already mentioned in the part of formal link.

Record 2: As a informal chatting, this record deals with various aspects. Opi Karim changes the issue and asks Mosharaof and Chanahal about their acting. So, the issue are not linked to each other. ### So, in record one there is cohesion of the events. But record two does not maintain cohesion among the issues.

Social background regarding usage of language:

In record one, there lies formal relationship between the interviewer and interviewee. But in record two, there lies informal and cordial relationship among the participants as belong to same profession. In record one, the interviewer does not use formal language. He uses informal language in formal setting. Such asinstead of . Instead of . perhaps he is not aware of this and it occurs for his social background. In record two, we find slauddin and Opi Karim use formal language than Mosfarrof. Such as he usesinstead of . Chanahal Ahowdhury also uses formal language. ### so, we discover that informal language can be used in formal setting and formal relationship, formal language can be used in informal setting and informal relationship. It occurs for social background of the participants. The interviewee in record one may have to work in different places with different people for his research. So, his language becomes informal but the participants of record two are from media. They maintain a certain status in our society. So, their language is formal. But, whatever the reason is, both the conversation is telecasted and it should be in formal language as the large number of people watch television and they keenly observe the language.