Transcription symbols.PPT

 Presenter: Wenwen Tian Co-authors: Dr. Pattamawan Jimarkon Asst. Prof. Dr. Wareesiri Singhasiri 22nd April 2011 Designing a Transcription System for Face-to-face PhD Supervisory Discourse: A Selective-specificity Model * Rationale Overview of data Theoretical background Procedures Conclusion Reflections Implications Outline * 1. Rationale What should be transcribed? How is it transcribed? Who should do it? Why? Research interests data analysis focus? Principles conventions? ????…………………………………….. * Recent research has been dominantly focused on reviewing transcription principles and comparing transcription conventions (e.g., Cook, 1995; Dressler Kreuz, 2000; Du Bois, 2010; O’Connell Kowal, 1999, 2010). Qualitative studies normally end up with several words (e.g., “verbatim” or “detailed” transcription was completed) documenting the transcription process as a take-for-grant method rather than the result of a series of choices (Davidson, 2009; Ochs, 1979). Empirical accounts of transcription process are needed (Davidson, 2009; Lapadat Lindsay, 1998). 1. Rationale (Cont’d) * 2. Overview of data Type: Audio-taped face-to-face supervisory meetings Time: June – September 2010 Participants: supervisors PhD candidates Setting: international doctoral program in Applied Linguistics Medium language: English Research purposes (PhD thesis research): To investigate knowledge building power manifestation by exploring linguistic features supervisory discourse patterns * 3. Theoretical background 3.1 Transcription as theory—Theoretical decisions Transcription is a selective process reflecting theoretical goals and definitions” (Ochs,1979, p. 44). Researchers make decisions about transcription that imprint the discourse theories they hold (Lapadat Lindsay,1998). A continuum of discourse theories (Oliver, et al., 2005): Naturalism_----------------- _de