Advances in Spoken Discourse Analysis

Caught in the act 113

T: Now you can do them in any order you like. Let’s see if you can sort

out which is which.

P: NV.

which elicits a non-verbal response from the pupils as they set about complying
with the directive.
The most typical classroom exchange, however, uses the full IRF structure.
This is when the teacher asks a question (I), a pupil responds (R) and the
teacher evaluates that response (F):

T: What is it?

P: Pair of scissors.

T: Pair of scissors. Yes pair of scissors.

The prevalence of exchanges of this kind is one of the most striking features
of the Sinclair and Coulthard data. But exchanges of precisely this kind in
which the move at F serves to evaluate the move at R are rare outside the
classroom. Consider the following exchange taking place between a husband
and wife in their sitting room:

A: What’s that you’ve got?

B: A pair of scissors.

A: A pair of scissors. Yes, a pair of scissors.

There is certainly something distinctly odd about this. We do not typically
evaluate responses in this way unless we are in something like the teacher—
pupil relationship. It is for this reason that Burton (1980) rejects the F move
and replaces it with a challenge.

A LOOK AT INFORMING AND ELICITING EXCHANGES

Berry (1981), however, points out that it is not the three-part structure in
itself which is odd outside the classroom. It is the evaluative function of the
Follow-up move which is very much a part of the teacher role and therefore
typical of the classroom situation and unusual outside the classroom. There
is nothing remarkable about the three-part structure in itself. Consider, for
example:

A: What’s that you’ve got?

B: A pair of scissors.

A: Oh.

Here the ‘Oh’ simply serves to acknowledge the response, not to evaluate
it. Berry goes on to elaborate the Sinclair and Coulthard model in order to
account for the difference between the evaluative follow-up in the classroom
and the kind of acknowledgement which is so common in everyday discourse.
She argues that the acceptability, and indeed prevalence, of evaluative follow-
up in the classroom is a feature of the teacher’s role, a role which she