Book contents
- Language Socialization in Classrooms
- Language Socialization in Classrooms
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Acknowledgments
- Transcription Conventions
- 1 Introduction
- Part I Socializing Values, Dispositions, and Stances
- 2 Interactional Contingencies and Contradictions in the Socialization of Tolerance in a Spanish Multicultural School
- 3 Shaping Sikh Youth Subjectivities in a US Gurdwara
- 4 Affective Stance and Socialization to Orthodox Christian Values in a Russian Heritage Language Classroom
- Part II Socializing Identities
- Part III Language Socialization and Ideology
- Part IV Conclusion
- Index
- References
4 - Affective Stance and Socialization to Orthodox Christian Values in a Russian Heritage Language Classroom
from Part I - Socializing Values, Dispositions, and Stances
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 10 February 2020
Book contents
- Language Socialization in Classrooms
- Language Socialization in Classrooms
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Acknowledgments
- Transcription Conventions
- 1 Introduction
- Part I Socializing Values, Dispositions, and Stances
- 2 Interactional Contingencies and Contradictions in the Socialization of Tolerance in a Spanish Multicultural School
- 3 Shaping Sikh Youth Subjectivities in a US Gurdwara
- 4 Affective Stance and Socialization to Orthodox Christian Values in a Russian Heritage Language Classroom
- Part II Socializing Identities
- Part III Language Socialization and Ideology
- Part IV Conclusion
- Index
- References
Summary
This chapter examines the socialization of affective stances towards church practicesduring classroom interactions at a Russian heritage language Orthodox Christian school in Southern California. Based on analyses of audiovisual recordings and ethnographic observations of classroom interactions over a year and a half, the importance of showing proper feelings, attitudes, and emotions towards practices of Orthodoxy was found to be a central theme in the teachers’ discourse. The analysis pays attention to teachers’ use of words, prosody, and embodiment in cultivating students’ appropriate affective stances towards priests’ and servants’ dress and the use of incense. Although children usually express agreement and alignment with the expected positive stances, at times they challenge the proposed stances in various ways. The chapter contributes to our understanding of the significance and mechanics of the often implicit socialization process that takes place in mundane classroom interactions, involving co-construction and negotiation of stances along with positioning of parties vis-à-vis each other in discourse.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Language Socialization in ClassroomsCulture, Interaction, and Language Development, pp. 71 - 90Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2020
References
Andrews, D. R. (1999). Sociocultural Perspectives on Language Change in Diaspora. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bakhtin, M. (1981). Discourse in the novel. In Holquist, M. (ed.), The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays by M. M. Bakhtin (pp. 259–422). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Baquedano-López, P. (1998). “Language socialization of Mexican children in a Los Angeles Catholic parish.” Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Burdelski, M. and Mitsuhashi, K. (2010). “She thinks you’re kawaii”: socializing affect, gender, and relationships in a Japanese preschool. Language in Society, 39(1), 65–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bryzgunova, O. E. (1977). Zvuki i intonat͡sii͡a russkoĭ rechi [Sounds and intonation of Russian speech]. Moskva: Russkiĭ i͡azykGoogle Scholar
Capps, L. and Ochs, E. (1995). Constructing Panic: The Discourse of Agoraphobia. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cekaite, A. (2012). Affective stances in teacher–novice student interactions: language, embodiment, and willingness to learn in a Swedish primary classroom. Language in Society, 41, 641–670.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cekaite, A. (2013). Socializing emotionally and morally appropriate peer group conduct through classroom discourse. Linguistics and Education, 24, 511–522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duff, P. A. (2007). Second language socialization as sociocultural theory: insights and issues. Language Teaching, 40, 309–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Du Bois, J. W. (2007). The stance triangle. In Englebretson, R. (ed.), Stance in Discourse: Subjectivity in Interaction (pp. 139–182). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DuBois, J. W. and Kärkkäinen, E. (2012). Taking a stance on emotion: affect, sequence and intersubjectivity in dialogic interaction. Text & Talk, 32(4), 433–451.Google Scholar
Erikson, F. (1982). Taught cognitive learning in its immediate environment: a neglected topic in the anthropology of education. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 13, 149–180.Google Scholar
Fader, A. (2011). Language socialization and morality. In Duranti, A., Ochs, E. and Schieffelin, B. B. (eds.). The Handbook of Language Socialization (pp. 322–340). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Goodwin, C. (2000). Practices of seeing: visual analysis: an ethnomethodological approach. In van Leeuwen, T. and Jewitt, C. (eds.), Handbook of Visual Analysis (pp. 157–182). London: SAGE.Google Scholar
Goodwin, C. and Goodwin, M. H. (1987). Concurrent operations on talk: notes on the interactive organization of assessments. IPrA Papers in Pragmatics, 1(1), 1–52.Google Scholar
Goodwin, C. and Goodwin, M. H. (1992). Assessments and the construction of context. In Duranti, A. and Goodwin, C. (eds.), Rethinking Context, (pp. 147–190). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Goodwin, C. and Goodwin, M. H. (2000). Emotion within situated activity. In Budwig, N., Uzgiris, I., and Wertsch, J. (eds.) Communication: An Arena of Development (pp. 33–53). Stamford, CT: Ablex.Google Scholar
Goodwin, M. H. (1990). He-Said-She-Said: Talk as Social Organization among Black Children. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Haight, W. L. (2002). African-American Children at Church: A Sociocultural Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
He, A. W. (2014). Heritage language socialization. In Duranti, A., Ochs, E., and Schieffelin, B. B. (eds.) The Handbook of Language Socialization (pp. 587–609). Malden, MA: Wiley Blackwell.Google Scholar
Labov, W. (1972). The transformation of experience in narrative syntax. In Labov, W. (ed.), Language in the Inner City: Studies in the Black English Vernacular (pp. 354–396). Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Larrivee, B. (2008). Development of a tool to assess teachers’ level of reflective practice. Reflective Practice, 9(3), 341–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lo, A. (2009). Lessons about respect and affect in a Korean heritage language school. Linguistics and Education, 20, 217–234.Google Scholar
Mehan, H. (1979). Learning Lessons: Social Organization in the Classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Moore, E. (2014). “You are children but you can always say …”: hypothetical direct reported speech and child–parent relationships in a Heritage Language classroom. Text & Talk, 34 (5), 591–621.Google Scholar
Murphy, K. M. (2011). Building stories: the embodied narration of what might come to pass. In Streeck, J., Goodwin, C., and LeBaron, C. (eds.), Embodied Interaction: Language and Body in the Material World, (pp. 243–253). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ochs, E. (1988). Culture and Language Development: Language Socialization and Language Acquisition in a Samoan Village. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ochs, E. (1996). Linguistic resources for socializing humanity. In Gumperz, J. J. and Levinson, S. C. (eds.), Rethinking Linguistic Relativity (pp. 407–437). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ochs, E. (2007). Narrative lessons. In Duranti, A. (ed.), A Companion to Linguistic Anthropology (pp. 269–289). Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Ochs, E. and Capps, L. (2001). Living Narrative: Creating Lives in Everyday Storytelling. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Pomerantz, A. (1984). Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In Atkinson, J. M. and Heritage, J. (eds.), Structures of Social Action (pp. 57–101). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Robblee, K. (1994). Russian word order and the lexicon. Journal of Slavic Linguistics, 2(2), 238–267.Google Scholar
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., and Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50, 696–735.Google Scholar
Swain, M. (2000). The output hypothesis and beyond: mediating acquisition through collaborative dialogue. In Lantolf, J. (ed.), Sociocultural Theory and Second Language Learning (pp. 97–114). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Thompson, I. (1977). Russian word order: a comparative study. The Slavic and East European Journal, 21(1), 88–103.Google Scholar
Wortham, S. E. F. (1994). Acting Out Participant Examples in the Classroom. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Yokoyama, O. (1994). Speaker imposition and short interlocutor distance in colloquial Russian. Revue des Etudes Slaves, 66(3), 681–697.Google Scholar
Zemskaja, E. A. (2001). Jazyk Russkogo Zarubezja: Obscie Processy I recevye portrety [The Language of the Russian Diaspora: Common Processes and Language Portraits]. Moska: Jazyki Slavjanskoj Kul’tury.Google Scholar
- 2
- Cited by