Also, Storch[29] examines four patterns of dyadic interaction that are collaborative, dominant/dominant, dominant/passive and expert/novice. The collaborative pattern denotes that there is moderate to high equality and mutuality. The dominant/dominant pattern means that it is moderate to high equality, whereas there is a moderate to low mutuality. In other words, there may “contribute equally to the task, but there may be very little engagement with each other’s contribution” [29]. The dominant/passive pattern denotes that the equality is moderate to low, so does the mutuality. The expert/novice pattern denotes that equality is moderate to low, but mutuality is moderate to high. Thus, it is concluded that not all interaction is beneficial. The effect of interaction is contingent upon its different patterns. Careless[30] indicates that group work benefits communication via creating a more congenial atmosphere, affording students time for preparing utterances.
2.2 Previous Studies on Interactional Competence
2.2.1 Previous studies abroad on interactional competence
CA is of paramount significance in second language teaching and research, since it can reveal “social organization in the natural language-in-use”[61]. Huth & Taleghani-Nikazm[62] point out that non-native speakers always change into target language in accordance with the sociocultural norms of their mother language no matter what their language proficiency is. Furthermore, Kasper[38] indicates that learners can’t acquire enough L2 pragmatic competence as a result of lacking sufficient and related examples of social interaction pertaining to target language in second language classrooms. In order to overcome challenges above, CA concepts training comes into being as a solution. CA is dependent upon the fact that natural interaction can explain how speakers achieve procedures of orderliness, sequence organization and turn-taking in a conversation. In a similar vein, the guideline of using authentic conversations can also be applied to L2 classrooms, and therefore learners would access to languages of daily life. It is CA that brings the social dimension into the classroom[63]. Using a CA pedagogical approach implies using real life language and thus delving into authentic situations[64]. Accordingly, CA training materials provide abundant empirical resources for linguistic teachers, and help second language learners integrate themselves into intercultural communication behaviors inside and outside classrooms[62]. Learners are no longer the “machine” in traditional SLA (input, output, intake, etc.)[65]. But CA is called into question in terms of its design to social interaction and does not seek to make claims to various language skills. Besides, its agnostic stance regarding cognitive processing mechanisms is criticized[66].
3 Methodology ......................... 20
3.1
