UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL DE EDUCACIÓN

Enrique Guzmán y Valle

Alma Máter del Magisterio Nacional

ESCUELA DE POSGRADO

ANALYSIS OF THE PRESENTATION “WHAT DO STUDENTS

BRING TO CLASS?”

Name: Lacey Lisbeth Conde Carhuancho

Course: Nature and Function of the English Language (MELT 104)

Teacher: Mg. Patricia Bendezú Bautista

Semester: First

LIMA – PERÚ

213
 ÍNDICE

INTRODUCTION

LANGUAGE ANALAYSIS

1. COMPONENTS OF LANGUAGE

2. COOPERATIVE PRINCIPLE OF CONVERSATION

3. SPEECH ACT

4. NON-VERBAL COMUNICATION

CONCLUSIONS

REFERENCES
 INTRODUCTION

Language is a tool for communication. We, as teachers, need to take into account
the real importance that everything that we say has meaning and intention. Even
when we do not talk, we are communicating something through the non-verbal
language. That is the reason why we have to give a real importance to language.

This analysis is about a video that was about a presentation of Miss Vanessa Díaz
Aybar, the topic she talked about was “What do students bring to class?” The
present report will cover the analysis of the components of language, the
cooperative principle of conversation, speech act and non-verbal communication.

Some references will be used in this report to sustain the analysis of the different
aspects of language Miss Díaz used in the presentation. Finally, there will be
conclusions of the whole analysis.
 LANGUAGE ANALAYSIS

Language is foremost a means of communication, and communication almost

always takes place within some sort of social context. This is why effective
communication requires an understanding and recognition of the connections
between a language and the people who use it (Anberg & Vause, 2009).

There are some aspects that we need to talk about when we mention language. As
it was remarked before, I will analyze the appropriate use of the components of
language, also the cooperative principle of conversation, the speech act and non-
verbal communication taken place in this presentation.

1. COMPONENTS OF LANGUAGE

a) Lexicon

Lexicon is made up by the words we use to give messages. It is very important the
correct use of lexicon to make us understandable. In this case, Miss Díaz began
her presentation using simple lexicon. Everything she said was related to the
general topic. The use of vocabulary of Miss Díaz was acceptable although she
made few errors. For example, in a part of her speech she said to her teacher: you
said “Expose”, I “exposed”. As we know, expose means to show something that is
usually hidden. She should have used the word explain, that works better in the
sentence.

b) Syntax

Syntax is also known as grammar. This is the rules which are used to combine
words to create sentences. According to Morris (1938), semiotics is organized into
three areas; one of these areas is syntax, which is defined as the study of the
interrelation of he signs. The use of syntax of Miss Díaz was correct most of her
presentation.

c) Morphology

She had some problems with word-formation of some of her utterances. In a part of
her presentation, she said “It’s more easy” when she had to say “It’s easier”.
Morphology is the study of the combination of words, in this case, the rule of
formation of comparatives says that we need to add –er to two-syllable words that
end in -y, -le, and –er.

d) Phonetics and phonology

These components of language study the sounds produced by the speakers and
the rules of their pronunciation. Miss Díaz had a regular pronunciation although
she had a good intonation in the phrases she wanted to focus.

e) Semantics and pragmatics

Miss Díaz was giving a speech about what teachers bring to class. It was
supposed to be a formal presentation. The context was a class of the Master’s
Program at Cantuta University. She was not prepared when she talked; she was
reading most of her presentation. In addition, she talked to her teacher as she was
talking to a friend, in a very informal way and showing that she felt angry and
uncomfortable. It was out of context. She said: you said expose, I exposed.

2. COOPERATIVE PRINCIPLE OF CONVERSATION

a) Quantity

She talked about motivation, metacognition but it could not be well understood
because she talked very little about the topic itself and she said: I agree with the
text, I disagree with it. The quantity was not enough to understand what she was
saying.

b) Quality

According to Grice’s Maxims, you do not have to talk about something you believe
it is false or something you lack evidence. Miss Díaz said that she did not know
exactly what she was talking about, she said: “In my opinion…”; “For me…”; “I
don’t really understand but I think…” Those expressions shows that she was not
prepared to give a presentation of the topic, she did not mention references to
asses her opinions. So her speech had not quality.
c) Relation

I consider that Miss Díaz and her partners talked about issues that were related
because they were all talking about students and their motivation, metacognition,
learning styles, etc.

d) Manner

Manner is the way a speaker expresses her/his ideas. Nolasco & Arthur (1987)
mention that we have to avoid obscurity and ambiguity in a conversation. In this
video, Miss Díaz, violated this maxim because she did not talk in a proper way,
when someone asked her how and why metacognition was important to students,
her answer was not clear because she included herself in the answer but she
never gave a good answer to the question. She said: In my opinion…, I’m talking
about me…

3. DISCOURSE ANALYSIS

In this part we will analyze some utterances:

 “Learning process is the same. There is no difference between public

and private schools”.

a) Locutionary force

Locutionary force is the act of saying something with a certain sense and
reference. In this case, the locutionary act would be the words “Learning process is
the same. There is no difference between public and private schools”.

b) Ilocutionary force

The ilocutionary force of the speech act is what we really mean when we say
something. In the same example of the woman who said that learning process is
the same, she really meant what she said; she said that statement as a conclusion
after listening to her partners and Miss Díaz. She also meant that everybody in the
class should stop talking about differences.
c) Perlocutionary force

A perlocutionary act is a meaningful speech act designed to have particular effects

on people who hear them. Therefore, following the same example, after this
woman said her statement, Miss Díaz agreed with her and she added that
motivation facilitates learning although learning process was the same. The effect
on Miss Díaz was that she agreed with her partner.

 “You say expose, I exposed”

a) Locutionary force

In this case, the locutionary force is the words that she has just said: You say
expose, I exposed.

b) Ilocutionary force

What she really meant is that she did not want to talk anymore; she also showed
that she disagreed with her teacher; she did not want to give any presentation and
neither to keep talking without being prepared.

c) Perlocutionary force

In this case the effect on her teacher was to ask to other students for questions.
The teacher did not consider she should sit without being asked about the topic
she was talking about.

4. NON-VERBAL COMMUNICATION

We could define nonverbal communication as the transfer and exchange of

messages in any and all modalities that do not involve words (Matsumoto, 2013).
In this aspect we could mention gestures, signs, colors, facial expressions, body
language, posture, etc.

Miss Díaz gave several messages with non-verbal language, it was not necessary
for her to tell that she was feeling upset and even angry when she began her
presentation. We could understand that she was uninterested in the presentation
by looking at her posture: she was sitting on the teacher’s desk, and her hands
were in her pockets. Also, the way she dressed talked to us, she was wearing blue
jeans (torn jeans) and a long-sleeve shirt, she was not wearing formal clothes. That
means she did not care much about her presentation.

During her speech she touched her face; she sighed and scratched her forehead.
Those gestures are part of body language; those movements could mean that she
felt nervous and non-confident about what she was saying, probably because she
had not read about the topic. She moved her hands while speaking; in some parts
of her presentation she just kept her hands into her pockets.

When one of her partners said something that she had said before, she smiled
showing that she was pleased to be understood by him. Her partners asked some
questions after listening to her, during this part of the presentation, all of her
partners used body language to make them more understandable. They moved
their hands, their heads and they had a straight posture when sitting, which means
that they were paying attention to Miss Díaz.
 CONCLUSIONS

 Language is very important and we should consider it to have a better

communication. Language is a tool for communication, through verbal and
non-verbal language we transmit a lot of messages that could be
understood by other people. We should take into account that verbal
language is important but also non-verbal because it is about 93 % of our
real communication. Therefore, our body language can speak even when
we do not say a word. We have to be careful about the context, who are we
talking to and where are we talking. Thus, pragmatics and semantics are
important too.
 This student, Miss Vanessa Díaz Aybar, did not take into account these
aspects of language. And she should have done that, she is a student of the
Master’s Program, she is a teacher or perhaps, a future teacher. She needs
to focus more on the type of language (verbal and non-verbal language) she
uses, especially when she is giving an academic explanation of a topic and
also when she is teaching.
 In conclusion, this course has been very useful because it showed us the
importance that language has in our lives. As teachers we must be careful
with the type of language we are using. Not only words give messages, our
gestures, movements and everything that we do has meaning.
 REFERENCES

ANBERG, J. & VAUSE, D. (2009). American English. Cambridge: CUP.

MORRIS, C. (1938). Foundations of the theory of signs. Chicago: University of

Chicago Press.

NOLASCO, R. & ARTHUR, L. (1987). Conversation. Oxford: OUP.

MATSUMOTO, D. & FRANK, M. (2013). Nonverbal communication. London:

SAGE.