Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, volume 430

Twelfth Conference on Applied Linguistics (CONAPLIN 2019)

A Conversation Analysis of Repair Strategies in

Indonesian Elementary EFL Students
Tita Novitasari, Ernie D. A. Imperiani
English Language and Literature Study Program
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia
Bandung, Indonesia
[email protected]

Abstract—This study investigated the types of repair one who corrects the problem. They also describe repair can
strategies and techniques of repair initiation used by Indonesian be initiated and resolved by the speaker who utters the mistake
elementary EFL students during the classroom interaction with during a conversation or by the interlocutor who hears it.
their teacher. The participants were elementary EFL students at Therefore, Schegloff et al. (1977) propose four types of repair.
the beginner level. By using qualitative research, the study used First, self-initiated self-repair (SISR). It occurs when the
four types of repair strategies by Schegloff, Jefferson, and Sacks trouble source is the speaker him/herself and he/she who
(1977) and techniques of repair initiation from Finegan (2008). repairs it. Second, other-initiated and self-repair (OISR)
The data were taken from video recorded of classroom appears when the interlocutor causes repair completion, which
interactions that were transcribed by applying Jefferson
is done by the speaker. Next, self-initiated and other repairs
Transcription Notation (2004). The findings of the study revealed
(SIOR) appears when the producer of the trouble source
that the students used all types of repair strategies. The most
frequently is OISR which obtained 23 occurrences (37.1%).
initiates then the interlocutor completes it. The last is other-
Besides, the three techniques were found in the conversation. initiated other-repair (OIOR) happens where the interlocutor
Asking questions toward the problem is the dominant one which notices the problem and repairs it for the speaker.
31 occurrences (50.0%). Another technique was revealed which is Besides the types of repair strategies, Schegloff et al.
giving a possible understanding of the problem. The results show (1977) proposed repair techniques. There are two techniques
that the speakers produced the trouble source more which to repair initiation. First, self-initiation within the same turn
affected the recipient to initiate asking for the repair, meaning use a variety of non-lexical speech perturbation such as cut-
that the trouble source identified by the teacher, but the students offs, sound stretches, ‘uh’. The second, other-initiation use a
repaired. The trouble source that appeared was affected by the group turn-constructional devices to initiate repair that is
students’ proficiency and the lack of topic knowledge. Also, the divided into several parts such as huh, what?, use question
teachers initiated asking for an explanation to raise the students’ words who, where, when, a partial repeat of the trouble-source
ability in terms of their English knowledge and speaking fluency. turn, plus a question word, a partial repeat of the trouble-
However, the teacher should allow the students to repair their
source turn, and the last is Y’ mean plus a possible
trouble source or problem themselves.
understanding of prior turn.
Keywords: Conversation Analysis, EFL students, repair Regarding repair analysis, there are some studies on repair
strategies, repair techniques strategies that have been conducted in various contexts. For
example in text-based communication, (e.g., Meredith &
I. INTRODUCTION Stokoe, 2014; Tiara, 2018), students with autism (e.g., Ohtake,
In recent times, the conversation has been extended into et al., 2005; Ohtake, Wehmeyer, Nakaya, Takahashi, &
spoken discourse such as doctor-patient consultations, news Yanagihara, 2011), and classroom (e.g., Cho & Larke, 2010;
interviews, talk show, and classroom interaction (Paltridge, Rabab’ah, 2013). In the EFL context, some studies have been
2006). To examine conversation, Conversation Analysis (CA) conducted, for example, Khodadady and Alifathabadi (2014)
becomes a suitable approach because it is the organization of on repair in Iranian intermediate and advanced learners and
social action through talk (Mazeland, 2006). The sociologist Chalak and Karimi (2017) who examined turn-taking and
Schegloff (1973) developed Conversation Analysis. repair strategies in Intermediate EFL learners.
In a study of CA, the phenomenon called repair is an II. METHOD
aspect of conversational interaction and becoming a crucial
thing in a conversation. Schegloff, Jefferson, and Sacks (1977) This study was qualitative because the data were
define repair as a tool used in conversation to correct an error conversational interaction in the classroom. Whereas, Wray,
made by speaker or trouble source and state that repair deals and Bloomer (2006) state that qualitative research involves
with recurrent problems in speaking, hearing, and more descriptions and analysis than computation.
understanding. There are two main types of repair strategies, The participants of the study were Elementary EFL students
namely self-repair and other-repair. Schegloff et al. (1977) at one private Elementary School in the Northern part of
explain that self-repair occurs when the speaker repairs the Bandung. In this study, the bilingual class consisted of 10 males
problem, while other-repair occurs when the recipient is the and 15 females with the same level ranging from 10-11 years of
age were selected.

Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Atlantis Press SARL.

This is an open access article distributed under the CC BY-NC 4.0 license -http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/. 207
 Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, volume 430

In analyzing the repair strategies, there are two essentials identified there was a problem in the student’s 1 utterance. In
terms of repair that need to be understood, namely repaired the conversation, when the participants are more than two, it is
segment and repairing segment (Schegloff et al., 1977). possible for the trouble source is initiated by more than one
According to them (as cited in Liddicoat, 2007), the bold clause recipient (Tiara, 2018). Then, the teacher used the particle of
is a repaired segment. It is as the trouble source or repairable, “huh?” when he noticed the trouble source. Also, the student 2
and the thing in the talk which needs to be repaired. Meanwhile, initiated asking student 1 a question by saying, “bukannya
the repairing segment is the segment of utterance that repairs went?” (isn’t it went?). The teacher also immediately asked the
the trouble source. It also must follow students the reason why the answer was “went” instead of “go.”
by another participant. The repairing segment can be done in
several ways for example by asking the question, repeating the turn, student 2 repaired the trouble source by answering the
misheard or misunderstood, or using particle and expression. teacher’s question and switching into Indonesian “karena sudah
(2.0) sudah terjadi” (because it’s already (2.0) already
III. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION happened).
The study revealed that there are 62 occurrences of repair From the excerpt above, the teacher or the recipient acted as
strategies used by EFL students that are shown and discussed the initiator; it is someone who initiates the trouble source,
below. while the student 2 or the speaker was the one who repaired the
utterance. In this case, when the recipient identifies the trouble
A. The Types of Repair Strategies source in the speaker utterance and initiate to get a clarification
The analysis of types of repair strategies used the theory or explanation toward the trouble source to the speaker, and the
proposed by Schegloff et al. (1977). The results showed that the speaker repairs it for the interlocutor, it is called as other-
participants used all types of repair strategies during the initiated self-repair (OISR) according to Schegloff et al. (1977).
conversation, which are self-initiated self-repair (SISR), self- It means that the teacher identified the trouble source, and the
initiated other-repair (SIOR), other-initiated self-repair (OISR), student did the repair (Chalak & Karimi, 2017). Besides, the
and other-initiated other-repair (OIOR). The results of the types students in the conversation answered the question by using
of repair strategies are shown in the following Table I. Indonesian because he was afraid that the answer would be
incorrect if he answered it using English.
TABLE I. THE TYPES OF REPAIR STRATEGIES C. Other-Initiated Other-Repair (OIOR)
No Types of Repair Strategies Frequency Percentage There are 16 occurrences of other-initiated other-repair
(OIOR). OIOR is how the trouble source is identified and
1 Self-initiated self-repair (SISR) 15 24.2% repaired by the interlocutor or recipient. According to Schegloff
2 Self-initiated other-repair (SIOR) 8 12.9% et al. (1977), other-initiated other-repair occurs when the
3 Other-initiated self-repair (OISR) 23 37.1% recipient completes the repair. In the analysis, this type
4 Other-initiated other-repair (OIOR) 16 25.8% appeared 16 times (20.8%). This is an example of how this type
Total 62 100% occurred in the conversation.

Table I shows that the participants used all types of repair Excerpt 2
strategies. The explanation of each type of repair strategies Student : I fell (2.0) bicycle.
employed by Elementary EFL students is discussed as follows. Teacher
B. Other-Initiated Self-Repair (OISR) In this excerpt, the participants were discussing the past
According to Schegloff et al. (1977), other-initiated self- tense. The teacher asked the students to give an example of a
repair (OISR) occurs when the interlocutor identifies the sentence in past tense form. In the next turn, one of the students
trouble source, and the speaker repairs it for the interlocutor. In gave an example. The trouble source appeared when the student
the analysis, there are 23 occurrences (37.1%) for this type. The uttered the example by saying, “I fell (2.0) bicycle.” The teacher
example is exemplified in excerpt 2 below. here indicated there was a trouble source in the previous turn in
terms of grammar. However, the student unaware of the mistake
Excerpt 1 in his utterance. Then, the teacher simultaneously initiated and
Student 1: I go to school with a motorcycle. repaired it into the correct one for the student by saying, “I fell
Teacher : Huh? off a bicycle.”
Bukannya went? The conversation among the teacher and the student above
(Isn’t it “went”?) showed that the teacher initiated and repaired the student’s
Teacher utterance into the correct one. As Schegloff et al. (1977) state,
Student 2: Karena sudah:: (2.0) sudah terjadi. when the interlocutor initiates and completes the trouble source,
(Because it’s already:: (2.0) already happened.) it is categorized as other-initiated other-repair. Tiara (2018) in
her study states that OIOR occurs when the initiation and
In this excerpt, the students here were discussing the past completion are done simultaneously. This strategy is used to
tense. One of the students (student 1) tried to answer the correct the problem that is produced by the current speaker as
question, but the teacher and another student (student 2) well as give the correct answer.

208
 Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, volume 430

D. Self-Initiated Self-Repair (SISR) In excerpt 4, the participants were discussing the past tense
Self-initiated self-repair (SISR) is slightly different from the form. The student in the conversation initiated asking the
occurrence of OIOR. In the analysis, SISR obtained 15 repairs teacher if the word ‘was’ was exchanged, would it become
“saw.” The teacher answered the question by saying, “it’s
(24.2%). This type is similar to OIOR. However, SISR appears
different.” After the student got the answer, he thought that he
when the speakers indicate their own mistake in their utterance
needed more explanation for the previous turn. Therefore, the
while conveying the message to the interlocutor. The following student initiated to ask another question to get a repair by
excerpt is an example of SISR. saying, “‘was’ itu untuk apa?” (‘was’ is for what?). Then, the
teacher repaired the trouble source by answering “for ‘is.’”
Excerpt 3
The following excerpt showed the speaker acted as the
Teacher : Ok. So (2.0) Ssstt! Helo? (3.0). Today, we are going trouble maker, and he would be the one who initiated the repair.
to discuss what we have studied yesterday, eh:: last week, and However, the person who completed the repair was the
before, and before, and before (2.0). interlocutor. It is called as self-initiated other-repair (SIOR)
Ok, now, uhh, how did you go to school today? Huh? By? By (Schegloff et al., 1977).
motorcycle? So, how do you say “saya pergi ke sekolah dengan
motor tadi pagi?” (“I went to school with motorcycle last F. The Techniques of Repair Initiation
morning”) Besides the types of repair strategies, this study also
Student : I’m go:: (1.0) I’m (3.0) investigated techniques of repair initiation. The theory based on
Student the framework proposed by Finegan (2008). In the analysis,
motorcycle. there are only three techniques used. However, another
technique was found, which is giving a possible understanding
In excerpt 3, the teacher asked the students what they toward the trouble source. The following Table II shows the
already studied in the last meeting. They were discussing the result.
material first before the class was started. The teacher asked the
students to translate the sentence into English, “how do you say TABLE II. THE TECHNIQUES OF REPAIR INITIATION
‘saya pergi ke sekolah dengan motor tadi pagi?’” When the
student tried to answer the question in the next turn, he was No. Techniques of Repair Initiation Frequency Percentage
repeating the word “I’m go (1.0) I’m (3.0)”, and cuts-off for
1 Asking question toward the problem 31 50.0 %
three seconds. But after he got the answer, he immediately 2 Repeat part of the utterance to be 13 21.0 %
repaired his utterance to make the message was conveyed well repaired
to the interlocutor by saying “I go to school (2.0) I go to the 3 Use particle and expression ‘uhh’ 2 3.2 %
school with motorcycle”. In the student’s statement, he realized 4 Abruptly stop speaking - -
that there was a trouble source in terms of his grammar that 5 Other (giving possible understanding 16 25.8 %
needed to be corrected. Therefore, he initiated to repair his toward the trouble source)
utterance by repeating his statement. Total 62 100%

In accordance with Schegloff et al. (1977) theory, the

The Table II above shows the most-frequently technique is
excerpt showed how self-initiated self-repair (SISR) used by
the student in the conversation. According to them, SISR takes asking question toward the problem. The explanation for each
the form of initiation with a non-lexical initiator, followed by technique is discussed below.
the repairing segment. To repair the errors in the conversation,
language users repeat words to achieve communication goals. 1. Asking Question

E. Self-Initiated Other-Repair (SIOR) Asking questions toward the problem is the most dominant
Self-initiated other-repair (SIOR) is the least type of repair one in the conversation among students and teachers. It reached
strategy used by EFL students. This type refers to the situation 31 occurrences (50.0%) out of 62. It means that this technique
when the initiation of repair is given by the recipient, while the used almost in half of the discussion. This technique appears
speaker does the repair completion (Schegloff et al., 1977). This either the speakers or the recipients ask a question to the
strategy emerged 24 occurrences (31.2%). The following interlocutor for repairing the trouble source. In the analysis,
excerpt is the sample of SIOR. asking question technique appeared in both OISR and SIOR
strategy. The explanations are shown below.
Excerpt 4
Student itu kalau dibalik jadi ‘saw’? 2. Asking question in OISR
(Does ‘was’ in reverse become ‘saw’?)
In the conversation, asking question occurred in other-
Teacher : Huh:: Beda lagi, it’s different.
initiated self-repair. The participants used this technique to get
(Huh:: it’s different, it’s different)
a clarification for the trouble source. Therefore, when the
Student itu untuk apa?
recipient initiates the repair to the speaker by giving a question,
(‘Was’ is for what?)
the speaker will correct the trouble source. The following
Teacher : For ‘is’
excerpt is the example of asking question toward the problem
in other-initiated self-repair.

209
 Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, volume 430

Based on the analysis, the occurrences of this technique

Excerpt 5 occurred 16 (25.8%). The excerpt 7 shows the example.
Teacher : Yes. ‘Saw,’ do you find it, ‘saw’? Yes, diagonal.
Student : It’s easy! Excerpt 7
Teacher Teacher : Nahh:: saw (2.0). Saw is not just see, tapi uhh (2.0)
Student : Yes! meet.
Do you know meet?
In excerpt 5, the students were doing an exercise in the form Student1 : Engga.
of a puzzle. One of the students thought that the task that was (No)
given by the teacher was too easy, then he said: “it’s easy!”. Student2 : Daging?
Hearing to the student’s statement, the teacher initiated asking (Meat?)
a question to the student by saying, “Huh? It’s easy?” In the Teacher Bertemu, meet (write the word on the board).
next turn, the student repaired for clarification on her statement
to the teacher by answering, “Yes!” Finegan (2008) claims the In excerpt 7, the teacher and the student were talking about
technique of repair initiation above is asking question toward the vocabulary. The teacher said and asked what the translation
the problem. This technique begins with an interrogative word. of ‘meet’ in Indonesian. The student’s 1 answer was he did not
Besides, when the participants find the trouble source in the know what ‘meet’ was, but another student (student 2) said that
conversation, they will actively offer a question to get more the translation of ‘meet’ means that it was ‘daging’ (meat).
explanations or clarifications for proper understanding (Tiara, However, the student’s 2 statements caused the trouble source
2018). in which the answer was incorrect. In the next turn, the teacher
immediately initiated and repaired the student’s utterance by
3. Asking question in SIOR himself into the correct one by saying, “bertemu, meet.”
In the conversation, the participants used other-initiated
Asking question toward the problem did not only occur in other-repair strategy. And the technique of repair initiation that
other-initiated self-repair, but it also appeared in self-initiated was employed is giving possible understanding toward the
other-repair. In SIOR, the speaker used this technique to get an trouble source because the teacher gave his understanding of
explanation and clarification toward the trouble source to the the mistake to repair student’s statement. It is called as giving
recipient. Excerpt 6 shows the example of SIOR in the possible understanding toward the trouble source (Schegloff et
conversation. al., 1977).

Excerpt 6 5. Repeat Part of the Utterance to be repaired

Student : Kenapa:: kenapa banyak yang bilang ‘I had’?
(Why:: Why do many people say ‘I had’?) Repeating part of the utterance appeared 13 occurrences
itu ‘aku benci’? (21.0%) in the conversation. The participants used this
(Does ‘I had’ mean ‘I hate’?) technique of repair initiation. It is because they recognized their
Teacher : Itu ‘hate’. Nah:: ini ‘I had.’ own mistakes and tried to repair it by repeating their utterance
(It’s ‘hate’. Nah:: this is ‘I had’) to get the correct answer, as can be seen in excerpt 8 below.

In excerpt 6, the student was wondering why other students Excerpt 8

said ‘had’. Then, he initiated to ask the teacher for clarification Teacher : Between, what is between?
what ‘had’ was by saying ‘I had’ itu ‘aku benci’? (Does ‘I had’ Di antara (1.0) Di tengah-tengah!
mean ‘I hate’?). The teacher, as the recipient, clarified that the
word ‘had’ did not mean ‘hate’ by saying “Itu ‘hate.’ Nah:: ini
‘I had.’ (It’s ‘hate.’ Nah:: this is ‘I had’)”. In the example of the repeat part of the utterance above, the
As can be seen in excerpt 6, according to Finegan (2008) the participants were talking about the preposition. When the
student used asking question toward the problem technique teacher asked the students the Indonesian translation for the
because he wanted to get a repair by asking the teacher a word “between” by asking “between, what is between?”. The
question toward the trouble source. The technique was used to student tried to answer the question, but she recognized the
avoid misunderstanding between the teacher and the student. trouble source in her utterance. Therefore, she had a role as the
one who initiated and repaired her statement by herself by
4. Giving Possible Understanding toward the Trouble repeating “Di antara (1.0) di tengah-tengah!” because she
Source wanted the interlocutor to understand her intended.
In excerpt 8, the student used self-initiated self-repair
Another technique was found in the conversation, which is strategy. According to Finegan (2008), repeat part of the
giving possible understanding toward the trouble source. This utterance to be repaired technique is when repair initiation that
technique is a combination of ‘Y mean plus a possible appears in the same turn as the speaker talks. Also, Rieger
understanding of prior turn’ technique proposed by Schegloff et (2000) states that repetition is the type of self-repair in which
al. (1977) in their theory of techniques of repair initiation.

210
 Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, volume 430

the repairable and repairing segments happen in the same turn, of English toward the topic in the discussion, hence, the use of
and the repair is performed by the initiator of the repairable. other-initiated self-repair (OISR) in the conversation.
REFERENCES
6. Use particle and expression ‘uhh’
Cameron, L. (2001). Teaching languages to young learners. New York, NY:
The particle and expression of ‘uhh’ appeared only twice Cambridge University Press.
(3.2%). Chalak, A., & Karimi, M. (2017). Analysis of turn taking and repair strategies
among male and female Iranian intermediate EFL learners. Journal of
Applied Linguistics and Language Research, 4(2), 1-9. Retrieved from
Excerpt 9 http://jallr.com/index.php/JALLR/article/view/508
Teacher : Which one is odd one? Cho, E. H., & Larke, P. (2010) Repair strategies usage of primary elementary
Student : Kick. ESL students: Implication for ESL teachers. The Electronic Journal for
Teacher English as a Second Language, 14(3), 1-18.
Student : Karena dia nendang (1.0) yang lain mah – uhh – Finegan, E. (2008). Language: Its structure and use (5th edn.). USA: Thomson
Wadsworth.
(3.0) bagian tubuh, anatomi.
Jefferson, G. (2004). Glosarry of transcript symbols with an introduction. In G.
(Because he kicks (1.0) and the other – uhh – (3.0) is a part of H. Learner (Ed), Conversation analysis: Studies from the first generation
body, anatomy) (pp. 13-31). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Khodadady, E. & Alifathabadi, J. (2014). Repair in EFL talk: A case of Iranian
According to Finegan (2008), this act is called a use particle intermediate and advanced EFL learners. Theory and Practice in
and expression ‘uhh’ when there is a pause in the middle of the Language Studies, 4(10), 2129-2137. doi: 10.4304/tpls.4.10.2129-2137
speaker’s utterance. The participant used this expression Liddicoat, A. J. (2007). An introduction to conversation analysis. London:
Athenaeum Press Ltd.
because she wanted to give the best answer by explaining her
Mazeland, H. (2006). Conversation analysis. Encyclopedia of Language &
statement carefully. Also, to make sure that the answer was Linguistics, 3, 153-163. doi: 10.1016/B0-08-044854-2/00314-X
correct, so the recipient could understand the message that she Meredith, J. & Stokoe, E. (2014). Repair: Comparing facebook ‘chat’ with
tried to convey. spoken interaction. Discourse & Communication, 8(2), 181-207. doi:
10.1177/1750481313510815
IV. CONCLUSION Ohtake, Y., Yanagihara, M., Nakaya, A., Takahashi, S., Sato, E., & Tanaka, M.
(2005). Repair strategies used by elementary-age beginning
Other-initiated self-repair (OISR) is the most frequently communicators with autism: A preliminary descriptive study. Focus on
used repair strategy among the students at the beginner level. Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 20(3), 158-168. doi:
Then, the speaker repairs his/her utterances for the speaker in 10.1177/10883576050200030401
the next turn. Therefore, the conversation can be Ohtake, Y., Wehmeyer, L. M., Nakaya, A., Takahashi, S., & Yanagihara, M.
understandable with each other. In the conversation among the (2011). Repair strategies used by verbal students with autism during free
students and their teacher, this OISR appeared because the play. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 26(1), 3-
14. doi: 10.1177/1088357610396079
students produced the trouble source more which affected to the
teacher to initiate asking for the repair. The trouble source was Paltridge, B. (2006). Discourse analysis: An introduction. London: Routledge.
affected by the students’ level of English competence that was Rabab’ah, G. (2013). Strategies of repair in EFL learner’s oral discourse.
English Language Teaching, 6(6), 123-131. doi: 10.5539/elt.v6n6p123
still at the beginner.
Rieger, C., L. (2000). Self-repair strategies of English–German bilinguals in
The finding also revealed that asking question toward the informal conversations: The role of language, gender and proficiency
problem gained 31 occurrences (50.0%). The teacher mostly (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Alberta.
initiated asking for clarification or further explanation to the Schegloff, E. A. (1973). Opening up closings. Semiotica, 8(4), 289-327. doi:
students’ statement. However, when the students tried to repair 10.1515/semi.1973.8.4.289
the repaired segments, they were sometimes confused. Their Schegloff, E. A., Jefferson, G., & Sacks, H. (1977). The preferences for self-
confusion caused repeating some part of the utterances, or cut- correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language, 53(2),
361-382. doi: 10.2307/413107
off for more than a second during conveying the message
because the lack of knowledge that they had. Although, the Tiara, A. (2018). Repair strategies in online chat: A conversation analysis
(Unpublished bachelor’s thesis). Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia.
present study showed that Elementary EFL students still could
Wray, A. & Bloomer, A. (2006). Projects in linguistics a practical guide to
answer the question by switching from English into Indonesian researching language (2nd edn.). London: Hodder Education Publishers.
or combining both languages. It depended on their knowledge

211