(1) facework in classroom interaction.3

7/21/2019 (1) Facework in Classroom Interaction.3

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/1-facework-in-classroom-interaction3 1/16

14

Accordingly, two analysis sheets (appendix A) were designed; one to separate outer and

inner structures and the other to divide each transaction into exchange, move, head act,

pre head act, post head act, supportive facework upper-strategy, and non-supportive

facework upper-strategy.

3- Results and Discussion:

This section presents an analysis of facework in naturally occurring interactions where

three different transactions are investigated.

3.1. Eliciting Transaction:

Extracts of an eliciting transaction are taken from a single classroom interaction, and

cover three types of teaching exchanges, in addition to boundary exchanges: T-direct, T-

elicit for the purpose of getting information (referred to as elicit-supply (Tsui 97)) and L-

elicit for the purpose of clarifying a point (referred to as elicit-clarify (Tsui 105)) .

3.1.1. T-Direct Exchange:

turnno.

speaker Outer Inner

1 T (Distributing exam

papers after being

marked):

these are your mistakes

2 T please look at the board and try to find the

mistake in each sentence and correct it.

3 L all these are mistakes!

4 T Yes there are many…

Shaimaa’

Only outer structure is used to organize the ongoing activity. While T is distributing the

exam papers after being marked, she opens the boundary exchange with a focusing move

(turn 1) that alerts Ls and directs attention to their mistakes. The move is non-supportive

face threatening, negatively marked non-politic. The opening move in the T-direct



15

includes three head acts of direct requests (turn 2), using the unmarked variant of the

requestive mood derivable strategy. The move is non-supportive face threatening.

However, T’s requests tend to give Ls’ the chance to regain face since she asks them to

find and correct their mistakes by themselves, besides being slightly mitigated by the

politeness/requestive marker ‘please’.

L responds to the requests by a statement (turn 3), marked as a question by intonation,

(Quirk et al 52 ), eliciting clarification or confirmation (Tsui 105), and seeking face

regaining. However, T’s follow up confirms the statement to continue the face

threatening process.

In this exchange, supportive facework is limited. Ls’ positive and negative faces are

threatened, yet collectively not individually: T does not attribute any mistake to any

specific L. She tends to save Ls’ faces by hiding names, discussing the mistakes as

common ones, and providing Ls the chance to correct the mistakes by themselves. In this

exchange T threatens Ls’ collective faces while saving their individual ones, which is

considered unmarked politic.

3.1.2. T- Elicit-Supply Exchange:

5 ! points to the inner structure.

turnno.

speaker Outer Inner

1 T Ok the first sentence

Yes Khalid

They did not forgot, did they?

2 L did they?

3 T What’s wrong? What’s wrong withit? Yes

4 L I think it is the verb.

5 T yes the helping verb here carries the

tense: did not”. So I don’t have tosay again the past. Ok that’s why it is

!5

but when I use a helping verb, thehelping verb will carry the tense.that’s why !

OK next one

“forget” not “forgot”. “I forgot”

I didn’t forget



16

The second exchange in the transaction starts and ends with boundary-framing moves

(turns 1 and 6) OK and OK next one, by which T enhances her face as a T who has

regulative/legitimate power.

Noticeably the Outer 6 column is mainly used with “brief sortie into the inner Dependent”

(Willis 10). T initiates the teaching exchange by eliciting Ls’ answers using the mood

derivable strategy of requesting, specifically the marked elliptical imperative: “ first

sentence Khaled ”, which is unmarked politic.

L’s response does not provide the right answer (turn 2 inner), so T’s follow up tends to

save his face by ignoring his incorrect reply, and repeating her request in the form of an

identification question: what’s wrong with it ? (turn 3). In his answering move (turn 4),

he provides the right answer preceded by a hedge I think it is the verb. T’s follow up

move indicates acceptance and confirms L’s response to enhance his face and hers as

well. She further provides an explanation for the rule to enhance her positive face as

having expert power. The facework in this exchange is supportive, unmarked politic.

3.1.3 T- Elicit Exchange (Free)! L- Re-Initiation Exchange ( L-elicit-supply

Bound) :

turnno.

speaker Outer Inner

1 T Ok next one

2 T no 3 Yes Mostafa I met the man whom saw him yesterday.

3 L I met the man who/whom I saw

yesterday

4 T yes yes

5 T This is the verb without the subjectdo you remember: any English

sentence must have a subject and a

verb.

whom or who I saw yesterday

6 “It denotes the occasional teacher correction or the supplying of an appropriate word or

phrase to help the discourse advance” (Willis 10).



17

The first exchange elicit-supply reveals the same pattern shown in the previous exchange

with the exception of the closing framing move:

T’s boundary framing move ! T’s Opening move! L’s Answering move ! T’s

Follow up move

The exchange reveals unmarked politic behavior with no noticeable supportive facework.

The unclosed exchange is developed into an L- elicit-clarify exchange as follows:

turnno.

speaker Outer Inner

1 T yes Riham

2 L1 ! him !!"#$ %&'( )*+,-. /. 0&

!"#$% &%'(!) &* ... !" 7{I am not convinced that I should delete

‘him’…in Arabic I say}

!"#$ %&'( )*+'( ,-./0 !

{I met the man who I saw

him}

3 T in Arabic it is the other way round. In

Arabic , the pronoun is added to the verb.This is in Arabic ...

4 L1 who I saw… I saw what

5 T No the rule in English is different from that

of Arabic …!"#$%&you are translating fromArabic. It is not idea of meaning it is just

idea of grammar. the difference is in thegrammar of English. There are articles in

English that are not found in Arabic. Howcan you translate it? it is not there

6 L2 !"#$

%&'(

)*+'(

!,-./

01/.-

2-+3'(

24

567"$.8! "#$ !"#$% &'() *+,$ -.

{I will put them into ease. In Arabic I maysay: I met the man who I saw, I don’t have

to say the man who I saw him}

7 T really !"# OK thanks

8 L2 !"#$ %&'( )*+'( !,-./ .0#

9 T OK thanks next one.

In this exchange bound to T-elicit, T starts with the boundary framing move (turn 1). The

teaching exchange is re-initiated by the move of L1 who comments on the previous

correction, eliciting clarification: I am not convinced that I should delete ‘him’ . By her

7 Translation of Arabic utterances is included between braces { }.



18

move, L1 defies T’s expert power and threatens her face. However, L1 immediately

provides a supportive facework strategy by giving a reason or a grounder for her

comment. In her answering move (turn 3), T replies, expressing disapproval by

explaining the rule in Arabic, in an attempt to save and regain her face. L1 reopens the

exchange by another move (turn 4) in which she elicits further clarification. In response,

T continues stating rules of grammar in English and Arabic to enhance her face. In turn

6, L2 interrupts and provides a response that enhances L2’s face and seemingly saves T’s

face. However, L2 unintentionally threatens T’s face, since the move indicates T’s lack

of knowledge.

T’s follow up move (turn 7) includes the acts of “evaluate”, showing surprise, to lose her

own face, and “thanking” to show gratitude to L2 and enhance his positive face. To

further enhance his face as a knowledge provider, L2 repeats his response (turn 8).

Finally, T closes the exchange with a boundary framing move that includes frame,

thanking and focus acts “OK thanks next one” to regain her face as a T.

3.2. Directing Transactions:

To reveal some of the strategies used by T to get L make a presentation, two directing

transactions are taken from two different interactions. In the following exchanges, T

chooses or nominates one of the Ls to make the presentation. Noticeably, both directing

exchanges reveal completely different facework strategies.


turnno.

speaker Outer Inner

1 T We will have our first presentation with a a a

what’s your name?

2 L So’ad

3 T So’ad !"#$ "% &'"#( come here Soad

4 L you haven’t decided …

5 T you will make a presentation No you presentation

6 L X X !"# $%&'()* %+,-. (make it an exception)

7 T No I don’t have excuses no I don’t have

excuses

8 T OK …. Marwa ...



19

This transaction is made of a boundary and two T-direct exchanges. In turn (1), T starts

with a boundary framing move that acts as a metastatement: we will have our

presentation with…” expressing his confident belief that the future event –presentation-

will take place. By using this strategy, T guarantees the future compliance of L, which

implies T’s superiority over L. However, it is internally mitigated by the use of “we” and

“our” to indicate that T and L are included in the activity as cooperators. This limited

supportive facework is unmarked politic.

The first T-direct exchange is opened immediately asking L about her name, (turn 1) to

reduce distance, seek affinity, and give her face. L replies (turn 2), and T’s follow up

move nominates L to make the presentation.

T opens the second T-direct exchange by making a direct request to L using the mood

derivable strategy (turn 3), reducing again distance by nominating her, an unmarked

politic behavior. L refuses to comply by making a claim (turn 4), to threaten T’s and L’s

faces. Noticeably, turn 4 marks the start of a series of reciprocal face threatening acts.

T’s follow up move is silence, ignoring L’s rejecting response and repeats the request

using the direct locution derivable strategy (turn 5), threatening L’s face employing no

supportive facework strategies. L is expected to comply, so as to close the exchange and

save her face. But as shown in turn 6, L’s response is non-compliance, ignoring T’s

request and making a plea to lose her face as a L, a negatively marked non-politic

behavior. T’s follow up move is explicit refusal (turn 7) to damage L’s face.

Ignoring L, T ends the exchange by a boundary framing move and nominates another L

to make the presentation (turn 8).

As indicated in the analysis, starting from turn 4, T and L exchanged face-threatening

acts. While the acts of T are regarded as unmarked politic given his powers as a T, those

of L are negatively marked and non-politic.

In this exchange, it is noted that a negative atmosphere prevailed and disharmony

between T and L escalated for several reasons:

1- The line T took in the interaction showed only one face: the face of a T with

regulative and threat powers. His unmarked behavior did not help in preventing

communication breakdown. T’s main concern was to save his own positive face.



20

2- T did not maintain poise8 (Goffman), which is one main type of facework, while

trying to regulate “expressive order”.

3- L’s face was hurt baldly because she did not save her face as an L who is expected to

comply to T’s requests and fulfill her learning and relational needs.


Turn

no.

speaker Outer Inner

1 T Our program today !"#$% & '#( )* we will have two or three presenters.

2 T We are going to have presentations Yes Go ahead

3 Ls X X X9

4 T but somebody must be prepared for it. May be Tarek , may be Khaled.

5 Ls XXX

6 T OK what do you think we are going to do…

presentations$%&'()*+ '),- .&'/0+ {yesterday we said that today there will be

presentations} Let’s talk about .. anything. Yeah

7 Ls XXX

8 T yeah In this course I’d like you to speak , speak and speak . So who’s ready to

stand here and speak ha …ha. I’d like to be democratic. !"#$%

&'

()*+%

,-.

/0 {I

don’t want to corner any one of you}

9 Ls X X X

10 T who would like to be a volunteer. No volunteers, no democracy

11 Ls XXX

12 T 3 yeah {look the most important thing is to comehere and speak}

13 L1 !"#$% &#'( )*% +,)-% &#'( {I may try… I may speak}

14 T Good Ghada first We are all here one family. Don’t be afraid. Don’t be shy.

All people make mistakes even your teacher makes mistakes

15 T Ok Ghada…. she will perform a presentation !"#$ %#& Ok you can start now

8 Poise is the capacity to suppress and conceal any tendency to become shamefaced

during encounters with others (Goffman 216). Poise is an important type of facework

because through poise one controls his embarrassment and hence the embarrassment that

he and others might have. According to Bousfield, poise, along with other traits, is

considered by students a valuable personal quality of a teacher (qtd. in Chesebro and

Wanzer 102)

9 X indicates that Ls are mumbling and no clear response is heard.



21

The transaction includes two main exchanges: Boundary and T-direct. In the Boundary

focusing metastatement, T enhances his positive face by showing regulative/legitimate

power, which is unmarked, politic. Although showing that he is the one in control by

setting the class agenda, T tends to use the pluralization form of you and I: we, our.

In the T-Direct Exchange, T makes six Opening and Reopening moves before he gets a

verbal reply from L. In his moves, the head act, which is making a ‘request’, is preceded

or followed by other acts that are meant as mitigating devices or boosters. In turns 2, 4,

and 6, T uses direct requestive strategies: locution derivable We are going to have

presentations, somebody must be prepared for it ; and mood derivable Go ahead ,Let’s

talk about .. any thing . To mitigate the force of the direct acts, which are face damaging,

he attempts to save L’s negative face by employing several supportive facework

strategies: (turns 2 & 4) impersonalizing the request by using we, somebody followed by

hedging post act May be Tarek , may be Khaled ; (turn 6) minimizing the imposition

anything, preceded by getting Ls involved what do you think we are going to do, stating

grounders yesterday we said that today there will be PRESENTATIONS. In turns 8 and

10, T uses conventionally indirect requests by questioning L’s willingness to participate:

who’s ready to stand here and speak; who would like to be a volunteer , by which he

tends to save Ls’ face by giving options, impersonalizing, and understating. These acts,

however, are followed by the non-supportive face damaging acts of warning I’d like to be

democratic {I don’t want to corner any one of you}; and threat No volunteers … no

democracy, regarded as unmarked politic. In turn 12, following the non-supportive

facework, T uses non-conventionally indirect request/advice the most important thing is

to come here and speak, to attend to Ls interests and show care. These supportive

facework strategies are noticed and, thus, considered positively marked politic.

The opening and reopening moves by T are received with Ls’ silence or some mumbling,

indicating their refusal or unwillingness to comply, and damaging their face as Ls. Their

silence in 3rd

and 5th

turns are unmarked politic since Ls are expected to be embarrassed

and afraid of losing their face. In turns 7, 9, and 11, Ls’ silence moves are considered

negatively marked non-politic, since it damages T’s face. Finally in turn 13, one of the

Ls makes a verbal answering move to comply hesitantly and save her own face, which is



22

unmarked politic. T’s follow-up move is the act of praise which he boosts with advice:

don’t be afraid. don’t be shy; and self-criticism: all people make mistakes even your

teacher makes mistakes. By the act of advice, T attends to Ls interests and shows care,

which is positively marked politic. In the self-criticism act, T tends to lose his own face

for the sake of Ls, which may be regarded as negatively marked non-politic over-polite.

T closes the transaction with Boundary framing/focusing move to enhance his positive

face, which is unmarked politic.

In this transaction, it is noticeable that T has preserved his poise and continued doing

facework despite Ls’ negative responses. He enhanced his face as a T who has regulative

power that enables him to open, regulate and end exchanges. T has exercised all sorts of

power he has: knowledge, reward, regulative, and threat.

The facework strategies he chose and poise helped him regulate expressive order,

encourage class cooperation, and gradually produce positive responses, which resulted in

creating immediacy and affinity in the classroom.

3.3. Informing Transaction:

Turn

no.

speaker Outer Inner

1 T next

2 T we have the !

!"

!#$

!%&#'

!"#"

$%&'()*

$%+,-(.

/

0102

3456

3-7

8$9:

;'7"

<=4>

?

@$A {we have herestudents who have recently joined faculty of medicine, we will listen how she

pronounces it}

sound /s/ as in

/d"s/ whichmeans !"#$ !

3 L1 / d"z/ !"#$ {/ d"z/ is more chic}

4 T !"#$%&

'"

()#&

'"

*+,- / d"z/

{you think / d"z/ is more chic, you Marwa the ruthless}

again it is / d"s

not / d"z/

5 L1 / d"s/ !"#$% {weak}

6 T {come on let’s check our dictionaries} !"# $%&'()*' +& ",(-./

7 T Heba … use your dictionary

8 L2 !"#$% &' {at home}

9 T !"#

$%&'(

)'*+#

,- {what is it doing at home?}

10 T !" #$%&'( )* +,-(./ 01234 5,* 6.708

{I’ll see if there is a dictionary in this desk}

I’ll check

11 L2 !" #$%&'() *+, -+. #$%&' () *+, {no need Dr. …no need Dr.}

12 T !"#$% &'() *+$% ,)% -+. /0 12 34% 5% 6"7839 :)% {how would you know if I am right

or wrong?}



23

13 L2 !"# !$% {there is trust}

14 L3 !"#"$% &'() *+,- ./01) 21- 3415 26!"#$% Mr !" #$% $&' {next time Mr. put a wrong

word to force them to check it}

15 T Ok

16 T how is it pronounced Mr. Gamal /s/ or /z/? , / d"s/ verb an

noun17 L4 /s/

18 T but in Egypt here how do we pronounce it?

19 Ls / d"z/

20 L3 cans !"!#$% dosa !"#$%&' !( )*+, #- ./#0 12)34

{do YOU know Mr. in German dosa means cans}

21 T Ok no. 5

This transaction is made of Boundary and Teaching exchanges, free and bound. The

Teaching exchange includes a free T-inform exchange, in addition to a T-repeat, three T-

elicit, a T-direct, a T-offer, an L-direct, and an L-inform that are bound to the T-inform.

T starts and ends the transaction with boundary framing moves (turns 1 and 21) to

enhance his face by showing regulative/legitimate power, unmarked politic.

In the T-inform exchanges, T’s opening moves are unmarked politic as he enhances his

face as having expert power. Following the first T-inform (turn 2 inner) comes the first

T-elicit exchange. The opening move (turn 2 outer) includes two acts: the head act elicit-

supply, preceded by the act of state, nominating an L and justifying his nomination: we

have here students who have recently joined faculty of medicine, we will listen how she

pronounces it , to give and save L’s face. In her answering move (turn 3), L1 performs

the act of evade by criticizing: / d ! z/ is more chic, which would have been non-

supportive facework if she had not used banter and joking, yet it is negatively marked

behavior. In the follow up move (turn 4 outer), T tends to save his face by banter and

joking: you think / d ! z/ is more chic, you Marwa the ruthless, seeking immediacy, a

positively marked politic behavior. In the T-repeat (turns 4 inner, and 5), T repeats the

same piece of information to regain his face, while the marked follow-up move of L1

(turn 5) evaluates T’s information: / d ! s/ weak, which would have been considered non-

supportive facework, unless she had not saved T’s and L’s face by using banter and

joking again.

Such a move urges T to open a T-direct by making requests and nomination (turns 6 and

7) to re-gain his face, which is unmarked politic. L2 answers by an evade act (turn 8)



24

which threatens L’s face, a negatively marked non-politic behavior. T’s follow up is a

blame act by which he threatens L’s face, yet an unmarked politic behavior.

Following the blame act, T opens a T-offer exchange (turns 10, 11, 12, and 13), which is

face supportive, giving L2 the chance to regain face, a positively marked politic behavior.

Although L’s answering move is made of a reject act: no need Dr. …no need Dr , yet it

tends to save T’s negative face by using deference (turn 11), a positively marked politic

behavior. In his follow-up move, T questions his credibility: how would you know if I am

right or wrong , to lose his face, which is a negatively marked non-politic behavior. L’s

follow up move (turn 13) is a compliment act: there is trust, to save T’s face, a positively

marked politic behavior. The T-offer exchange is closed by an L-direct (turn 14) in

which L3 gives a piece of advice to T: next time Mr. put a wrong word to force them to

check it . By this act, L3 threatens his face, a negatively marked behavior, slightly

mitigated by giving deference term of address.

Following the L-direct, T initiates two T-elicit exchanges (turns 16, 17, 18, and 19)

which are made of two moves only, T-Opening and L-Answering. In these two

exchanges, T enhances his face, which is unmarked politic and saves L’s face by

deference and referring to the mistake as a common one, a positively marked politic

behavior. In their answering moves, Ls tend to enhance their face as Ls, an unmarked

politic behavior.

The teaching exchange ends with an L-inform one-move exchange (turn 20), in which

she provides a new piece of information: do YOU know Mr. in German dosa means cans,

which threatens T’s face as the knowledge provider in class, yet slightly mitigated with

the use of deference term of address.

In this transaction, age-based variation is detected: young Ls, males and females, while

showing their relational needs, by employing banter and joke, they show respect and give

deference to T, which symbolizes their subordination to T. Old Ls, on the other hand,

have the face of some one in a higher status, who is keen on showing self-respect, saving

his own positive and negative face and refusing to accept or make jokes.

4- Conclusion:

This study is an attempt to analyze and reveal some of the supportive and non-supportive

facework strategies employed by both Ts and Ls in Egyptian EFL classroom interactions.



25

The interaction is hierarchically segmented into transactions, exchanges, moves, and acts,

following Sinclair and Coulthard. The faces of T and L are analyzed into constituents,

and the facework is classified into supportive and non-supportive upper-strategies, under

which come strategies and sub-strategies. Having analyzed naturally occurring classroom

transactions, the following findings are reached:

I- Ts tend to use the following supportive facework upper-strategies when

interacting with Ls:

1- Saving Ls’ positive face detected only in T-elicit exchanges in which T adopted the

following strategies:

A- Showing reward power by:

• thanking L for providing correct knowledge ;

•

accepting and confirming Ls’ responses in the follow-up move;B- Attending to Ls’ relational needs and attaining their relational goal by:

• nominating L by name;

• discussing mistakes as common ones;

• providing Ls the chance to correct their own mistakes by themselves;

• overlooking incorrect answers and repeating the question;

• using banter and joking.These strategies are considered unmarked politic since they are conventionally used by

Ts.

2- Saving Ls’ negative face in T-direct exchanges, whenever s/he uses the direct

requestive strategies, by employing the following strategies:

A- Not showing coercive power by:

• giving options;

• using understaters;

• using hedges;

• minimizing the imposition.

These strategies may be considered positively marked politic.

B- Showing integrative power by:• including L and T in the same activity by the use of pluralization;

• stating grounders.

These strategies may be considered unmarked politic.

3- Enhancing Ls’ face in T-direct exchanges by employing the following strategies:

A- Showing reward power by:



26

• giving advice;

• making offers.These strategies may be considered positively marked politic

4- Saving her/his own face in T-inform and T-direct exchanges, when s/he is about to fall

out of line or to lose face, by using any of the following strategies:A- Showing integrative power by:

• using banter and joking.

This strategy may be considered positively marked politic

B- Showing expert power by:

• repeating the same piece of information.

This strategy may be considered unmarked politic.

C- Showing legitimate power by:

• repeating request.

This strategy may be considered unmarked politic.

5- Enhancing her/his own face by the following strategies:

A- Showing regulative power by:

• starting and ending transactions by boundary framing moves (used in allexchanges);

• opening a teaching exchange ;

• nominating Ls in T-elicit and T-direct.

These strategies may be considered unmarked politic.

B- Showing expert power in T-elicit and T-inform exchanges by:

• imparting information;

• accepting Ls’ responses in the follow up move;

• explaining rules;

• evaluating Ls answers.These strategies are considered unmarked politic.

6- Losing her/his negative face:

A- Showing integrative power by :

• making an offer.

This strategy is regarded as positively marked politic.

II-Ls are likely to use the following supportive facework upper-strategies when

interacting with Ts:



27

1- Saving T’s face when refusing to comply with a request in T-direct, T-elicit and T-

offer by the following strategies and sub-strategies:

A- Addressing T’s legitimate power by:

• giving deference.

This strategy is considered unmarked politic.

B- Addressing T’s integrative power by:

• using banter and joking;

• paying compliments.

These strategies may be considered positively marked

2- Saving their own face in T-direct, and T-elicit by the following strategies and sub-

strategies:

A- Fulfilling relational needs by:

• impersonalizing mistakes;

• using banter and joking when refusing to comply;

• using hedges.

These strategies may be considered positively marked politic.

B- Showing verbal responsiveness by:

• Responding positively to T.

This strategy is considered unmarked politic.

3- Enhancing their own face in T-elicit and L-elicit by the following strategies and sub-

strategies:

A- Showing verbal responsiveness by:

• imparting new information;

• responding positively to T.

These strategies may be considered unmarked politic

B- Seeking to fulfill educational and learning needs:

• Eliciting new information from T.

This strategy may be considered positively marked politic.

III- Ts may threaten Ls’ face by adopting the following non-supportive facework

strategies:

A- Showing legitimate power in all exchanges by:



28

• Nominating Ls;

• Eliciting Ls’ responses;

• Denying an L’s request.

These strategies are considered unmarked politic.

B- Showing coercive power in T-direct exchanges by:

• Blaming Ls for a wrongdoing;

• Warning Ls of consequences;

• Threatening Ls with a punishment.

These strategies may be considered negatively marked but politic.

IV- Ts may lose their positive face when they follow the non-supportive strategy of:

A- Belittling their expert power by means of :

•

self-criticism;

• admitting mistakes;

• questioning their own credibility;

• showing lack of knowledge.

These strategies may be considered negatively marked non-politic.

V-Ls may threaten T’s face by the following non-supportive strategies and sub-

strategies :

A- Defying T’s expert power in L-elicit, T–elicit and T-direct exchanges:

• showing disagreement and non-conviction;

• imparting new information, unknown by T;

• giving advice to T.

These strategies may be considered negatively marked non-politic.

B- Defying T’s legitimate power in T-direct:

• resisting his commands.

This strategy is considered negatively marked non-politic

VI-Ls tend to lose their own face by the following non-supportive strategy and sub-

strategy:

A- Showing lack of verbal responsiveness in T-elicit and T-direct:

• Resisting T’s commands and requests.

This strategy is considered negatively marked non-politic.



29

These findings provide answers to the questions of the study. Furthermore, the upper

strategies revealed in the exchanges under study are found consistent with the categories

suggested by Flowerdew. However, evaluating facework strategy as unmarked politic, or

positively marked politic or negatively marked politic has been problematic. The

researcher has evaluated facework strategies as unmarked or marked only on the basis of

her personal experience as a T, which is considered a limitation of the study. That is why

the findings of the study need to be evaluated by both Ts and Ls to determine by

themselves what they consider unmarked or marked, politic or non-politic, appropriate or

inappropriate.

(1) facework in classroom interaction.3

Documents