The first Period Meeting

in-group positions clear. Then, each participant’s coded functions of utterance were compared in a timeline in order to observe chronological changes.

((glimpse R1) Douyatte tsukurondaro (how can we make it)°

4 JL Donnna: (what) What (.) n? ((joining her both hands making sounds, looking at NL *A ))

5 NL =((copying JL’s gesture, looking at JL )) °Kiji (dough) °

6 JL What. what sh. should, what do you. what do I what should you. what do you. un? what do you need. for. (1) do you need to: to: to: to cook to make piro. piroshki↓

7 R1 (.)>OK<I will count ↑ [how] many. and what, and [write it] ((writing gesture *B)) OK?

8 JL [un] [un]

9 JL =Write it ↓ write it? ah, yeah.

10 R1 =((nodding)) =OK↓ OK?

11 JL =Mi, mizuto (water and) (1) °mizuto (water and)°komugiko (flour)?

12 NL °Komugiko (flour)°? (( looking at R1))

In this meeting, NL had the goal of getting the information about the recipe from the foreign participants in order to report it to her boss, Ms. Y. After R1 suggested that they make piroshki and salad as a Russian dish, NL tried to get some information about the ingredients and the procedure of making piroshki (Lines 1, 3). Neither JL nor NL knew the recipe (2, 4), so they looked at each other and synchronized gestures to express the shape of the piroshki (*A)(4, 5).

Interpreting NL’s murmuring in Japanese as a request for a translation, JL tried to ask about the ingredients for pirosh ki in English; however, her utterance in English was not smooth enough to make her point clear due to the repetition of

*B

words and the taking of too much time (6). Listening to JL’s utterance, R1 suggested that they should not discuss the recipe in the meeting, but get the written recipe after the meeting to make her point clear, using writing gesture (*B) (7). JL seemed to understand R1’s intention (8, 9), but did not translate R1’s suggestion, instead telling NL the ingredients of piroshki, which were flour and water (11). NL confirmed the information provided by JL to R1 with the question

“flour?” (12). Very possibly, R1 suggested that JL write down the recipe with the expectation of understanding each other more clearly than they could by talking.

However, JL did not understand R1’s intention and force d the conversation on her own.

Excerpt 2

1 R1 Ko:bo. ((gazing up from her dictionary, looking at NL)) 2 JL [Ko:bo]?

3 NL [Ko:bo]?

4 R1 Ko:bo?

5 NL =a:: °what’s°((snapping her fingers)) koubokin (yeast) 6 JL (.) Koubo, kouboka (yeast, yeast) a::

7 NL Iisutokintte kotoyane (it means yeast, doesn’t it) 8 JL =Iisutokin, iisutokin (yeast, yeast)

9 R1 ((showing NL her dictionary)) 10 NL >Yes yes yes yes< koubo (yeast)

((snapping her fingers) but, pain ha: (1) tsukuttearuyatsuwo

((making a square with her fingers to express the shape of bread)) tsukaou, kigiha:

*C

(let’s use the store-bought bread for the dough) ((turning toward JL *C))

11 JL =OK, u::n, kiji (dough) ((looking at the dictionary)) (3) cl o? jana (not)material, do you know, material.

12 R1 ((looking into the dictionary *D)) uh-huh↑

13 JL A, materials, ah, a, to, to make materials, so to take time↑

14 R1 =uh-huh

15 JL =Time, so, ah:, un, we we alter, alter, alter, alter, ah, bread, br eads, (.) bread pain

16 R1 Can I see the pain? and I would say if it is ok or not, ok? ((with irritated voice))

17 JL Can I see? n?

18 R1 Look at this bre(h)e(h)a(h)d 19 JL =a, OK

20 R1 I don’t understand what we are talking about

In this conversation, R1 tried to tell NL and JL that they needed yeast to make piroshki by looking for the Japanese translation in the dictionary (1). NL and JL understood R1’s intention (2-8). However, NL suggested that they use store-bought bread instead of making the do ugh from scratch because she knew about the limited time and budget for the event (10). NL looked at JL to ask for a translation after her utterance, as did R1 to listen to JL’s translation (*C) (10).

Gathering both sides’ attention, JL started to search f or the word “yeast,” which she did not know in English, and showed them the word she found in the

dictionary (*D) (11). JL tried to translate NL’s suggestion to use the store -bought

*D

bread, but the sentence she uttered was again too repetitious and unclear to make sense (11, 13, 15). R1 tried to imagine what JL was trying to say and understood her intention to some extent, but could not hide her irritation (16, 18, 20).

This conversation took place only a few hours after the IVP members arrived at the Kids’ Village. Since the Kids’ Village did not hold an introductory meeting soon after their arrival, at that point the only person who could provide information about the camp to JL and R1 was NL. As confirmed in Study 1, NL had the strongest right to speak because she was the only person who knew the whole procedure for the international cooking activity. However, because NL’s English speaking competence was not sufficient to explain the details of the event to R1 in English, it was necessary for her to a sk JL for a translation. NL did not directly ask JL for a translation, but often gave cues, such as asking questions or answering not directly to R1 but to JL, and speaking in Japanese. NL and JL understood each other easily when speaking in their mother t ongue, so they tried to move the conversation forward; however, that resulted in isolating R1, which irritated her.

As mentioned before, NL had a purpose in this meeting: to get the recipe for piroshki so that she could give it to her boss. That information was not shared with R1, so she could not understand why NL was trying to get the recipe “now.”

NL did not explain her mission to JL even in Japanese, so JL did not know NL’s intention either. It was JL’s role to mediate between the Kids’ Village

participants and the foreign participants, but JL’s English speaking competence and knowledge about the camp were not sufficient at this time to explain the

circumstances to R1. Their lack of knowledge about the event and lack of English/Japanese speaking compete nce restrained the communication and negotiation of meaning in this conversation, which ended up being vague and inharmonious.

In the absence of a person who could use English and Japanese freely for communication, they attempted to reach a mutual understa nding using whatever possible resources they could (English /Japan ese as a L2, gestures, asking JL for translations, dictionaries). For example, NL often asked JL for translations, but at the same time she attempted to use English words that she knew and m ixed them into Japanese sentences (though not enough for mutual understanding). R1 also tried to translate the word “yeast” into Japanese as “kobo” after she found the word in her dictionary and used “pain” instead of “bread,” as JL and NL used the word. Although the conversation did not completely yield mutual understanding, the process of meaning negotiation demonstrates their active challenge. Their communication adjustment was made to fill in their lack of knowledge about the event through L2 speaking competence. Another possible force to forward their conversation was the rush to get things done in time for the event. Whether or not they understood each other enough in the meeting, they had to feed the children with food cooked by them in a few days. Th at situation brought them toward an abstract shared goal for the conversation.