hospital teacher | Acta Medica Marisiensis

Introduction: Reality and thoughts are created through acts of speech. Our experiences are inseparable from the actual situation. Language use and repair organization during conversation depend on the communication situation wherein the speakers are involved rather than on social parameters.
Purpose: The purpose of the present study was to select the communicative event during hospital teachers’ tutorial. The peculiarity and importance of this situation is that it differs considerably from the routine, institutional classroom teaching process. The present paper intends to show the difference between repair and correction. In addition to these, we can observe disparities between selfrepair and other-repair.
Material and method: The corpus of the investigation was constituted by the transcripts of three geography lessons conducted by the hospital teacher. The study pays special attention to the consequent discussion of self- and other-repair in classroom talk. The aim of the corpus-based transcription of the recorded lessons is to find answers to the repair questions in this special classroom situation.
Results: The main problem of the study was who repairs whom and the linguistic devices used during classroom sequences. Finally, we focused upon the analysis of other-repair instances.
Conclusion: Observations should be extended to compare the results obtained with normal classroom procedures.

Introduction: Repair mechanisms, both marked and unmarked, are present in institutional interactions including family doctor-patient and hospital teacher-student encounters. While in most of the cases unmarked repair is carried out by the dominant partner, sometimes marked repair mechanisms are initiated by the client. The present study was undertaken to throw light upon these marked repairs. The aim of the study is to compare two interactions, the first is between a GP and a patient and the second is between a hospital teacher and a student.
Material and method: The dominance relations in the recorded and transcribed dialogues were shown as the first step in the investigation of the repairs. After realising typical repair mechanisms, the focus of the analysis is directed to special occasions, where the initiator is not the dominant participant.
Results: The doctor-patient relationship can be characterized by the dominance of the doctor and in the teacher-student encounter by the dominance of the teacher. Although in most of the cases the dominant participant initiates the turns, the initiation of the non-dominant party can also be observed, in 16–20 % of the encounters.
Conclusions: The relatively frequent repairs of the non-dominant party suggests a diversion from the conventions of the institutional talk, which requires further investigation.