A second story arises from a first story and is usually told by a different teller than the
first story (Sacks, 1992) and a second story is in some way related to the preceding story
(Jefferson, 1978). These second stories provide another example of how notions of
conversation analysis (CA) are evident in classroom storytelling (see section 5.2.1 for story
preface); however, CA’s role in this study is simply to inform the already established
analytical frameworks, the Labovian narrative structure framework and the social activity
framework. In this dataset, however, there were two types of second stories: (1) teacher
second stories told by the same teller (the teacher) and (2) student second stories told by a
different teller (the student). Although there is only one example of the former in the dataset,
146
5.3.1 Teacher Second Stories
The one and only example of a teacher second story is M-sensei’s Jazz Dancing (see
appendix Q for full transcript), the abstract of which was examined in section 5.2.2.4 (Extract
5.6). The second story is indicated by the italicized narrative elements in the left-hand column
in lines 64-80. In this TPN, M-sensei is showing students how to make effective use of one’s
textbook while teaching and he is speaking to the whole class. In the first story, M-sensei tells
students how because of his wife being out of the house at jazz dancing lessons he ends up
doing most of the housework and subsequently drinking more beer. In this teacher second
story, M-sensei starts talking about his cleaning robot beginning on line 64.
Extract 5.22 (Teacher Second Story 1: Jazz Dancing, M-C-102111-4-12)
EVA T =which I shouldn't. (-)
54
EVA but we: (-) uh (-) >we manage.< (-) ok? (-)
55
EVA it- it’s fu::n (-) actually. (-)
56
EVA I enjoy doing, (-) housework (-) ok? (-)
57
EVA 'cause I am not (-) pressed for $time$ (-)
58
EVA I'm >not pressed for time.< >you know.< 59
EVA it- (-) it’s not that, (-)
60
EVA I have to do this and that, (-) before the:n (-) ok (-)
61
EVA you know by tomorro::w (-)
62
EVA or by (-) next week perhaps (-)
63
COM >we have a cleaning robot in our house< (-) ok? (-)
64
COM we release the r- robo:t (-)
65
COM and this robot, (-)
66
COM cleans and sweeps the floo::r, (-)
67
COM in the living room. (-) ok? (-)
68
COM there's a threshold (-) so, (-) we just lift up (-)
69
COM a- and (-) put it (-) in the other section, (-)
70
COM goes over, (-) ((laughing)) (-)
71
COM very interesting, (-) robot. (-)
72
COM it's a female robot. (-)
73
COM she talks (-) in >female voices yes< (-)
74
COM sh- >she actually talks back< (-)
75
COM like “empty me?” (-)
76
COM “clean my bo:dy” she says (-) [((laughing))
77 COM Ss [((laughing)) 78 COM T Really. (-) 79 COM Ss ((laughing)) 80
The second story contains simply a complication and is about M-sensei’s cleaning robot. The
main story evaluation in lines 54-63 does not present any prompt to the cleaning robot;
147
lines 56-57 of the main story evaluation, that it is perhaps at this point that M-sensei
remembers his cleaning robot and how it adds to his enjoyment of cleaning.
Because there is only one example of a teacher second story in this study, it is
difficult to argue what its impact has on students. Hiro, M-sensei’s student participant, does
mention the main story in his diary, however, he does not comment on this second story.
5.3.2 Student Second Stories
Student second stories can be found in both the student diaries and student interviews.
There are eight such stories in the diaries and two in the student interviews. Among the 10
student second stories, seven are from Maki and Aya, Mr. H’s students, and three are from Kanako, Ms. L’s student.
In one exemplary case, Maki, Mr. H’s student participant, retells the same second
story in both her diary entry and in her interview. What is interesting to note about this is that
the diary was written soon after the lesson, whereas the interview was conducted at the end of
the semester, about one month later, yet similar second stories were told. In his short TPN,
What Does That Mean?, Mr. H explains how he does not use direct translation in his head to talk with his father-in-law in Japanese.
Extract 5.23 (Student Second Story 1: What Does That Mean?, H-C-062512-8-53)
ORI T yesterday my (-) my lovely wife's father
1
ORI came over for coffee
2
COM my wife was out, (-)
3
COM so it was just papa and I ta:lking and, (-)
4
COM he doesn't speak English, (-)
5
EVA and I'm >not going to go,< (-)
6
EVA wha:t does tha:t mea:n. (-)
7
EVA OK, I want to say this.
8
Maki, in her diary, writes:
My discussion partner and I both learned English through listening and speaking like babies acquire a language, and we are not actually conscious of the process of how we are using Japanese and English.
148
In her interview, when discussing which TPN she will most remember which is What Does
That Mean?, Maki tells a similar second story to the one told in her diary entry above: Ah, because I myself use my language that way ‘cause I learned English in an early age and I don’t translate Japanese or English by ( ) and but sometimes I see many students, Japanese students, who translate what they’re going to say in head before they speak and it takes so much time and they always stuck in their speech and I feel that language should not be that way.
(Maki, Interview, 07/27/12)
These two second stories are prompted from the same TPN which was told in a lesson on
language. Therefore, it is unsurprising that Maki’s stories are also about language and specifically her use of the English language.
Sacks (1992) explained how a recipient exhibits a proved relationship or a claimed
relationship with the teller. In a proved relationship, the recipient demonstrates an
understanding by sharing a second story (cf. Sato, 2002), and in a claimed relationship, the
recipient might simply say ‘I know what you mean’.
What is important to note here is that in casual conversation the proved or claimed
relationship is usually shared with the main storyteller immediately or soon after the telling of
the main story. In this study, however, it is unclear if students shared second stories in the
classroom either with the teacher or with their classmates because the microphone was
focused on the teacher talk. When asked if students shared second stories in their small
groups, Maki, Mr. H’s student, responded that students do indeed do this. Detailed studies on the recipient of second stories and the effect this has on the telling are lacking and may be an
interesting area for future research.
An example of a student second story exhibiting what may be a proved relationship
comes from Aya, one of Mr. H’s student participants, in her diary. In his TPN, Turn Off My
Cell Phone (see appendix BB for full transcript), Mr. H had talked about cell phone addiction and how he turns off his cell phone while on vacation. Aya reacts to this TPN in her diary:
I liked his story, but I am not sure if I can agree with him. In Februrary, I studied abroad for a month, and I could not live without my smarphone. Since I did not bring my computer with me, I used my smartphone to text, call, and skype with my family in Japan. I found myself searching for Wi-Fi areas, and even though I knew it was not such a good thing, I was very
149
addicted. For me, my smartphone was a great tool to communicate, and I don’t think I can live without it. However, I think I cannot deny the fact that ‘smarphone abuse’ is a serious problem, and I will have to respect his side of the story as well. In that context, I think he gave me a very good point of view, which I will have to think about myself.
(Aya, Diary, 05/14/12)
This diary entry suggests that Aya has understood Mr. H’s story, disagrees with him, and explains why through her second story of her own addiction to her cell phone. Student tellings
of second stories may be an indication of student understanding and learning.