1.

INTRODUCTION Good conversation could promote friendships because sharing some things about you will make other people feel close and trust you. Another positive effect of being a good conversationalist is popularity and being liked because people have the impression that you are approachable. Other people will feel at ease in your company such that you shall be invited in many of their activities and this could widen your network of friends and business associates. Good conversation also gives one an image of being witty, intelligent, and self confident.

The type or mood of conversation depends greatly on who the participants are, the topic being discussed, the relationship between or among the participants (are they old or new friends?), or their respective ages. In this regard, it is important to always put in mind to whom one is having a conversation with and you should not fail to adjust the conversation accordingly. 2. CONVERSATION ANALYSIS Conversation Analysis is distinguished from all other approaches to discourse and pragmatics in the social sciences by its focus on action. Any phenomenon in talk-in-interaction can be examined to see what job it is doing, in this place, in this unfolding conversation etc. When conversation analysts build collections these are, with a few exceptions, collections of actions, for example assessments, repair initiations, requests etc. When such collections are made, it is routinely found that a single such job may be accomplished by a range of distinct linguistic, and sometimes non-linguistic, components. Furthermore, the particular practice selected for doing a job may have different sequential consequences. So, for instance, next turn repair can be initiated both by partial repeats of the turn containing the trouble source (with or without a wh- question word) or by components such as huh? However these set up different relevancies for next turn and thus result in distinctive trajectories of action.

Conversation 1 Date: 1st July 2009 Time: 2.30 pm In a clinic, while waiting for their turn to see a doctor, a mother was having a conversation with her son. Mother: So What did you do in school today? Son We played uhm ca:ndy la:nd, uhm (w-) we played race cars and (uh fire) Mother: Son: Son: [ How do you play race cars ] (3) (4) (5) (6) Fire drills andwe got to talk on the Radio and we got ta building four (And we got ta say it bit louder like this) Whydja say that ((shouts)) BUILDING FOUR like that Mother: This sequence is the most prevalent when it comes to initiating conversation. The conversations analyzed for this study begin with mothers (adult) asking a question to son (child) about what she has done at school during the day. The conversation usually begins with a question by mother and an answer by the son. The mother initiates the conversation with a question in first line , and the son provides an answer in line 2. The mother then initiates a second question, which is not picked up by the son. Instead, the son continues with his explanation about the fire drills incident. The sons failure to pick up his mothers question in line one may demonstrate his lack of knowledge in the organization of turn-taking. The son may not necessarily recognize his turn as having to build off of his mothers previous statement. It seems rather that the son may not have been finished with her turn at talk so continued until she was finished. When his mother asked his question, the son didnt recognize a need to stop his explanation and address this new question. Rather than re-ask her question from line 2, the mother builds her turn off of her sons last statement. (1) (2)

This act by the mother demonstrates her acknowledgement of her sons need to finish his utterance. This question and answer sequence serves as a way for the mother to keep the conversational turn-taking moving. A typical pattern is for the adult to ask a question and then provide more specific follow-up questions in order to keep the conversation moving, such as what the does in the last line .

Conversation 2 Date: 3rd July 2009 Time: 11.00 am This conversation is between a father, a mother and their teenage daughter, which was observe in a relatives house. Father: Alia Sudah...go and round up all the baju and basuh. (1)

Jangan asyik nak myspace and facebook aje. Mati la macam ni. Day in, day out depan pc aje. If not, I am going to revoke the privileges of surfing. Mother: Hantar aje ampang...tak ada PC ...dok tengok muka nenek ....baru padan!!! Father: Ok juga tu, if not let us send her to Singapore with her aunts and uncles Mother : NoNoNoInternet connection there is extremely fast nanti terus tak sekolah. Alia: OkOkOk.. no need to send me anywhere Ill do the laundry. In this conversation, the father starts in an instructive manner, demanding the daughter to complete the household cores. The fathers voice was stern although theres still some room of compromise. The daughters failure to pick up her fathers instruction in line one may demonstrate a 3 (5) (4) (3) (2)

teenagers lack of knowledge in the organization of turn-taking. The daughter may not necessarily recognize her turn as having to build off of her fathers previous statement. As there were no response from the daughter and the mother had suggested (threatened) the daughter to send her to the grandmothers house with no internet access. The daughter still did not response and the father indicated that he agrees with the mothers suggestion. The daughter failed to recognize the turn-taking in this conversation. Only at the end of the conversation, the daughter feels the need to respond to her parent. A typical pattern is for the adult-teenagers conversation where the adults speaks (nags) a lot more than the teenager,. Conversation 3 Date: 6th July 2009 Time: 1.30pm During lunch in a restaurant, three colleagues were having conversation about a movie: Lady 1: I nak tengok movie Ice Age 3 tonight with my kids (1)

Lady 2 : Dear...I pun dah janji dengan the kid nak tengok Ice Age 3, (2) tapi tak cukup korum lagi., sorang lagi anak perempuan I tak balik minggu ni, kena tunggu next week la Man 1: Aku dah tengok Ice Age 3...kelakar...Manny & Ellie dah dapat anak nama peaches..cute macam mak dia. Lady 3: I saw the movie last nite...best sangat...!!! Lady 1 : Kalau macam tu, I nak tengok esok, nanti nak booking tiket 3.30 tomorrow The conversation was initiated on a topic of a movie where Lady 1 indicates the interest in the movie, Ice Age 3. Lady 2 indicated the same interest, but has to wait for another daughter until next week. In this conversation the (4) (5) (3)

participant have knowledge of turn taking without any interruption from the members. The conversation soon became a promotion for the movie as it was highly recommended by one of the members. Conversation 4 Date: 9th July 2009 Time: 10.00 pm The following conversation were recorded in an office. Lin: I hate durian.......and i repeat ..I hate durian.... Ida : Tak kenal maka tak cinta....... Lin : There r more things that i miss besides durian... i miss (3) my single days.........Ida..biar aku tidak mengenalinya...malas nak jatuh cinta pun...baunya...masyallah.........memang tuhan aje yang tahu.... Alya : Durian gooooooood haha . bau dia pehh , hebattt : tak de buah lain bole lawan Rosita : I love durian.. durian.. Yummy!!! Erein : If u can survive mz life u can survive durian smell hehehe Andy : ha ha ha , that so funny , "i love durian......and i repeat.. i love durian... o.k one more Suraya : 1st thing when we all balik kampung this next weekeend...insyallah.....durian yang aku cari...huwahhhh (7) Lin: Su...sekarang everywhere durian........... pening kepala ..... keluar (8) kereta aje bau durian..the sad part is..makcik sebelah nie bawak balik durian banyak and letak kan porch dia...aduh... kepala ana sangat la....oh people.. help me help me.......... Chia: If you can't beat them,...join them lo...it won't hurt you.. (9) (6) (5) (4) (1) (2)

Lin started the conversation by voicing out her dislike of durian. However it was disagreed by others who love durian. In line 3, Lin was trying to explain her dislike of durian especially the smell. It was followed by disagreement of

other member who likes durian very much. The conversation were fluent and where all members synchronise the timing of their utterances precisely, predicting accurately when the other will stop talking.At the end of the conversation Lin firmly announced that she dislike durian very much.

3.

APPLYING IN ESL CONTEXT Conversation analysis of authentic materials can be incorporated into the language class so that students can be beneficially exposed to an environment similar to the real world where the target language is used. Through analyzing authentic materials, students can experience the pauses, repairs and clarifications apparent in unrehearsed dialogues. Realizing such "imperfectness" in conversation compared to elegant public speech, students may feel more relaxed and gain more confidence to engage in conversation in English. And the more enthusiasm they devote to oral English, the better communicative competence they will develop. Through engaging in conversation analysis, students especially those learning English as a foreign language may hopefully gain a fresh view of English as a linguistic tool rather than just a school subject. Teaching ESL by way of conversation, a common practice in face-faceinstruction, is becoming highly motivating to ESL students. First of all, the fact that the non-native speakers in the sample often chose to opt out in situations where they needed to speak up and clearly express their opinion shows that there is a demand for explicit instruction of the speech act of disagreement expression. It should be an essential element of any speaking curriculum as it is crucial for empowering ESL learners to master everyday situations successfully and to not be taken advantage of in real-life encounters outside of the secure classroom environment. Second, it appears to be beneficial to familiarize students with the concept of the Bulge Theory. This

will not only sensitize them for the diversity of social encounters, but also make them realize the need for a wide repertoire of disagreement expressions. Below is a framework for conversational ESL instruction. This framework entails two parts: an overview and a dialog. The overview part is a short paragraph for the ESL student to grasp the topic. The conversation part consists of a dialog written for two speakers, the student and teacher. To make the most of this conversation, the student and teacher role play alternately in the online class. The following pedagogical will benefits teaching by way of conversation in : increases student motivation to improve spoken English -provides immediate feedback to the student to correct errors and make improvement quickly -provides meaningful context for the student to focus on and learn new concepts presents a model for the student to see both formal and informal usage of English Below steps to prepare a conversational lesson: 1. Write a short overview paragraph on a topic of interest to ESL students. 2. Write a short dialog for two speakers. 3. Generate questions on the topic from the overview. Depending upon online class length (45 -60 minutes), 3 questions are sufficient for the lesson plan. While teaching, more questions on the topic and language mechanics will occur from the student and instructor. 4. Explain the vocabulary. 5. In the online class, role play alternately with the student.

4.

CONCLUSION Conversation analysis is concerned with detailed organization of everyday conversation, addressing specific issues such as How do people take turns in conversations?

How do people open and close conversations? How do people launch new topics, close old ones, shift topic, etc.? (topic development) How is it that conversation generally progresses satisfactorily from one utterance to the next? (adjacency pairs/exchange)

The roles of speakers and listener change during conversations. Such changes are carried out in an orderly and ritualized manner by people, who follow consciously or un/subconsciously the norms considered appropriate in a particular speech community. Conversation involves turn-taking and that the end of one speakers turn and the beginning of the nexts frequently latch onto each other with almost perfect precision and split-second timing (Sacks, Schegloff, and Jefferson, 1974). Overlap of turns occurs in only about 5% of conversation or less in ordinary conversations, strongly suggesting that speakers somehow know exactly when and where to enter (Ervin-Tripp, 1979, cited in Cook, 1999, p. 52). People take turns when they are selected or nominated by the current speaker; or if no one is selected, they may speak of their own accord (self-selection). If neither of these conditions applies, the person who is currently speaking may continue. While the current speaker is talking, listeners are attentive to the syntactic completenes or to the clues in the pitch level that may indicate that a

turn is coming to a close. There are specific linguistic devices for getting the turn when one is unable to enter the normal flow of turn-taking. Distinct turn-taking systems are by no means definitive of institutional interaction. Indeed, as indicated earlier, many forms of institutional talk do not manifest specialized turn-taking systems at all. Nor do the turn-taking features described above distinguish news interview turn-taking from the special forms of turn-taking that are present in related institutional contexts such as the courts and even some job interviews. To distinguish these, it is necessary to go more fully into both the formal design and the content of questions and responses in these contexts. However specialized turn-taking systems profoundly structure the frameworks of activity, opportunity and interpretation that emerge within them. It is for this reason that the determination of their existence (or not), and investigation into their features is an essential step in the analysis of institutional talk.

REFERENCE 1. Nofsinger, R. E. (1991). Everyday conversations. Newbury Park: Sage Publications. 2. Have, P.T. (1999) Doing Conversation Analysis. California: SAGE Publications. 3. Hutchby, I. and Wooffit, R. (1998) Conversation Analysis. G.B.: Polity Press.

10