168 Difference
Prof.: 3 sec.—“What’s the amount?”
Mr. A.: 4 sec.
Prof.: 4.40 min, ending, “Does- did the advertisement constitute an offer?
Mr. G.”
Mr. G.: 16 sec.
Prof.: 9.49 min., spelling out facts and issues of next case, ending, “What made
this offer extraordinary? What- what took it out of the category of being
an ordinary offer? (.03 pause) () if you pick this one up, you’re going to
be reading all of the materials very, very well. This is a difficult question.
Mm-hmm.”
Mr. B.: 1 sec.
Prof.: 6 sec.—“That’s not the writ, it’s not the writ, the written bid itself, uh,
good shot.”
Mr. B.: 3 sec.
Prof.: 5 sec.—“Something, this power of revocation is simply not going to exist
on this contract.”
Mr. D.: 4 sec.
Prof.: 26 sec.—“Why? [... ] Why did they provide the bond with the bid? (.07
pause)”
Ms. F.: 23 sec.
Prof.: 3.36 min., ending, “And you would have to focus on that half of the
sentence and then pick up the point that is made in the notes that follow
the case. Mm-hmm, Mr. uh, H.?”
Mr. H.: 11 sec.
Prof.: “That’s right.”—3.12 min., ending, “What does, what does this court, this
case tell you that you’ll have to do to succeed here? Mr. T.?”
Mr. T.: 9 sec.
Prof.: 12 sec.—“Well, that was one of six elements in a two-part of the legal
standard it focused on. And I want to make sure we get the whole picture.
That was one of the elements it focused on. Uh, Ms. N.?”
Ms. N.: 9 sec.
Prof.: 11 sec.—“Again, you’re- you’re spelling out a particular element, but,
well, what’s the broad, what’s the broad remedy here? What’s the broad
option here? Mr. M.?”
Mr. M.: 4 sec.
Prof.: “Okay [... ]”—7.28 min.In these 26 turns, the professor takes up 23.52 minutes, and the students’ total time
is 1.51 minutes; he thus occupies more than twelve times the amount of time taken
by the students in the dialogue here, although he takes the same number of turns.^36
Notice that if we ignore the amount of time taken by the professor turns, the dis-
cursive structure is not unlike that in our short-exchange classes (and, just as in
some of those more conversational classes, if we ignore the fact that different stu-
dent speakers are responding to the questions, we would find some similarities to