O n f e r e n c e

comp. 
dist
[… 13 contributions missing…]
[13:38:12] Student 1 says: So they are in 
com.dist
[…37 contributions missing…]
[13:49:40] Student 20 says: does this mean all allophone of a phoneme is 
comp.dist
, Teacher 1? 
[Phonology seminar] 
The teacher uses the reduced form 
comp. dist.
for
complementary distribution
. Student 
20 follows this directly, with Student 1 using a variation on that form. However, this is a 
rare example, and mostly students do not adopt tea
chers’ norms at all. The following is a 
representative example: 
[13:19:55] Teacher 1 says: that's the tricky thing about 
presupp
: it's such 
obvious information that we tend to miss it 
[13:19:56] Student 25 says: right 
[13:20:06] Student 1 says: I see 
[13:20:08] Student 22 says: sometimes we confuse between these two 
definitions? 
[13:20:23] Student 7 says: I see 
[13:20:26] Teacher 1 says: two definitions? do you mean 
implic
too? 
[13:20:34] Student 22 says: yes 
[13:20:36] Student 27 says: Now I got the point. 
[13:20:37] Student 20 says: which definition? 
[13:20:47] Student 20 says: well, got it 
[13:20:48] Student 25 says: 
pressup
and 
impli
[Language and politics seminar] 
The teacher’s reductions of 
implicature
and 
presupposition
are clearly not adopted by 
Student 25. 
Conclusions 
We have seen evidence in this article that non-native speakers do not regularly adopt 
native speaker norms regarding reduced forms in computer-mediated communication. In 
fact, they actively seem to choose not to adopt such norms. This very much supports the 
contention that members of communities of practice decide their own norms. We have 
also seen that methodologically it is not such a problem to study norms using small 
datasets. The process can be seen across the data, with variations being evidence that 
norms are being negotiated. 
References 
Colpaert, Josef. 2013. Sustainability and research challenges in CALL. Plenary lecture to 
WorldCALL 2013 conference. 10-13 July, Glasgow, UK. 
Jiang, Yajun. Chinglish and China English. English Today 11 (1): 51-53. 
Kachru, Braj. 1985. Standards, codification and sociolinguistic realism: The English 
language in the outer circle. In Randolph Quirk and Henry Widdowson (eds.). 11-30. 
English in the World: Teaching and Learning the Language and Literatures. Cambridge: 
Cambridge University Press. 

---

-359- 
2014 CALL Conference 
LINGUAPOLIS
www.antwerpcall.be 
Larsen-Freeman, Diane. 2012. Complexity theory. In Susan M. Gass and Alison Mackey 
(eds.). 73-87. The Routledge Handbook of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: 
Routledge. 
Larsen-Freeman, Diane and Lynne Cameron. 2008. Complex Systems and Applied 
Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 
Lave, Jean and Etienne Wenger. 1991. Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral