Berns Prelim 1

An Analysis of Aviation Communications,

Aviation English,

and Methodology

Kitty Campbell Laird

Purdue University

Berns Prelim 2

What research methods have been used in analyzing aviationcommunications and phraseologies? What approaches to text/discourseanalysis do they represent? In their analysis, which coding schemes areused? Review these schemes, and then assess which, if any, would beappropriate – and why – for the project you propose to undertake for yourthesis study.

Introduction

This paper will address the research methodologies which have been used in

analyzing aviation English and communications. I will address the relevant taxonomies

and coding schemes implemented and propose possible applications for my research.

Research in Aviation Communications

The majority of research conducted regarding aviation communications utilized

one of several methodologies. Varieties of discourse analysis have been used to analyze

corpora of pilot and Air Traffic Control recordings and codify the phraseology and

structure of aviation English, survey data has been collected by self report mechanisms

such as NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS) forms detailed below, and

field studies and experimental simulations have attempted to study phenomena of

aviation communications. While nearly ten years old, the following meta analysis

provides a good introduction to the types of studies commonly occurring in the field of

aviation.

Berns Prelim 3

Prinzo & Britton (1993)

This study analyzed 43 reports regarding the literature to date for pilot and

controller communications. The make up of the reports was 45% survey data, 41% field

studies, and 14% laboratory studies. The review addressed three major questions: 1) What

is known about ATC/pilot voice communications and the issues pertaining to

miscommunications? 2) What approaches have been used to study miscommunications?

and 3) What research needs to be performed so that real solutions can be offered to the

aviation community? The emergent hypothesis was that miscommunications occur more

often when air traffic controllers experienced overload due to heavy traffic, frequency

congestion, and lengthy messages. Data in the studies presented was collected from

NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS) forms, audiotape analysis, and

laboratory studies. The meta analysis compared and contrasted various taxonomies

including Kanki & Foushee's speech act coding scheme, Morrow, Rodvold, & Lee's

taxonomy of routine vs. non-routine transactions, and Cardosi & Boole's time

components in ATC/pilot verbal communications. The analysis concluded that audio

taped communications data bases could be helpful in post-communication analysis and a

globally implemented taxonomy for aviation speech acts should be established to report

findings in a uniform and systematic way for better comparison between studies.

Prinzo and Britton collaborated on the report; however, their analysis and

synthesis methods were not described. The study was descriptive in nature and did not

contribute any original research, as it only provided a synthesis of existing literature. It

did give an accurate picture of the research that had been conducted previous to the date

of publication regarding pilot/controller voice communications. No previous study had

Berns Prelim 4

offered such a comprehensive cross-study analysis.

Philips (1991)

Philips explored how official phraseology of air traffic communications differed

from natural English. He studied the official phraseology of the Civil Aviation Authority

Radiotelephony manual in addition to research from the Ecole Nationale de l'Aviation

Civile, Toulouse, France. The emergent hypothesis of the study was the International

Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) phraseology has a special purpose sub-grammar. The

corpus consisted of 541 phraseological utterances and 36 structural modifications. Philips

taxonomized and coded the phraseology and compared the sub-grammar to natural

English. He determined that aviation phraseology has two sub systems: 1) English as a

sub-grammar and 2) a context and domain dependent speech community.

The corpus samples were limited to European standards and thus do not

generalize to air traffic communications conducted in the United States. Although ICAO

proposes to be an international flight organization, it does not have any regulatory power

as an arm of the United Nations; therefore, international communications standards are

only advisory in nature. Standardization and usage of official phraseology was

determined via regulatory aeronautical manuals. Actual practical usage was not evaluated

and as such the applications for real-world communications were not addressed. The

study did highlight the need for a global topography or taxonomy of aviation phraseology

in order to better understand flight communications.

Berns Prelim 5

Morrow, Rodvold & Lee (1994)

The study used Clark & Schaefer's collaborative scheme (1987) as a framework to

organize what they termed "routine" and "non-routine" communications. The context and

participants consisted of a corpus of recordings of pilot and controller communications

gathered Three regions of the United States. Communication transactions were gathered

from West Coast, Midwest, and Southeast, level 5 Terminal Radar Control (TRACON)

centers. The emergent hypotheses was that non-routine transactions often lead to

miscommunications. While 42 hours of data were collected, only 12 hours were

"randomly selected" for analysis. Of this 12 hours, six were from approach frequencies

and six were from departure frequencies. A taxonomy based on the collaborative scheme

was used to code the transmissions. Analysis found 163 non-routine transactions with

understanding problems and 120 with information problems. It was concluded that non-

routine transactions decreased efficiency by focusing on resolving problems rather than

allowing for the presentation of new information.

The scope of the study was limited. While three regions of the country were

represented, the East Coast was not. I question why the Southeast was selected over the

East. The East has some of the busiest air space in the nation including New York City

and Washington, D.C. Without representation from this region, the study is not

generalizable to the entire U.S. Inter-rater reliability was accounted for by gaining

agreement (77% - 91%) on 15 transactions containing 149 speech acts; however, only two

raters coded the data. I would have preferred at least three raters if not more. The study

did demonstrate the applicability of the collaborative scheme for analysis of Air Traffic

Control communications.

Berns Prelim 6

Prinzo (1998)

Prinzo analyzed voice communications in a simulated approach control

environment to determine if workload effected the performance of air traffic controllers.

The study involved 24 full performance level controllers from two terminal radar

approach control (TRACON) facilities. Her emergent hypothesis was that controllers

under high stress or workload display higher vocal pitch, louder voice volume, and

increased rate of speech. Data was collected from both simulations and the field. The

simulation environment produced 13,900 transmission consisting of 33,000

communication elements. Field recordings consisted of 1900 transactions and 5,336

communication elements. VERBEX voice recognition software was used for initial

transcription of the recordings. The Aviation Topics Speech Acts Taxonomy (ATSAT)

was utilized to analyze communication elements. The study found similarities in

communication style between simulation and field recordings.

Participants in the study were primarily male with a male:female ratio of 9:1 at

TRACON 1 and 10:2 at TRACON 2. Sex of the controllers was not considered as a

covariate. There were limitations in the VERBEX voice recognition software, as the

system was unable to accommodate non-standard language beyond the restricted

phraseology of air traffic control. Natural language was therefore, not accounted for in the

study. The study did demonstrate that simulations can provide relatively equivalent

environments to real life TRACON situations. Simulators could be utilized for future

experimentation and training.

Berns Prelim 7

Morrow & Prinzo (1999)

Researchers hoped to gain insight into the presentation of information, specifically

looking at the effect of grouping or chunking information on memory capacity. The study

hypothesized that "grouped" information would reduce memory load of pilots. "Paid

volunteers" consisting of 21 males and 3 females were randomly assigned to "grouping"

or "control" groups. Other variables included instructional type and mission sequence for

simulation flights. Two days were devoted to the experiment with the first day including

pretesting and familiarization training. Pretesting consisted of a demographic

questionnaire and the administration of the Weschler Adult Intelligence Scales-Revised

sections including Forward Digit Span score and Backward Digit Span score. On the

second day, the missions were flown in a simulator which served as the post-test. During

these "missions" pilot and controller communications were recorded on audiotape. Voice

communications were analyzed by a primary coder who held a private pilot certificate.

One of the principal investigators served as a secondary coder. An analysis of variance

led to only two significant findings: 1) "grouped" information tended to be read back

sequentially: F (1,42) = 4.3, p < 0.5, and 2) "grouping" condition made fewer requests for

clarification: F (1,42) = 4.1, p<0.5. It was determined that the hypothesis was generally

not supported.

While the pretest may not have contributed to any practice effect, the

familiarization training may have done so. The first day's training included 20-25 minutes

of listening to air traffic control communications consisting of 70 multi-instruction

messages. This in combination with the training mission in the Basic General Aviation

Research Simulator (BGARS) may have predisposed participants to the types of

Berns Prelim 8

responses and simulator actions expected. Extraneous variables, such as age of the pilot

participants could have greatly impacted memory. Further studies could explore if longer

air traffic control messages overload pilot memory and if so, experiments could be done

with different message simplification schemes in a more controlled and systematic

environment. While not the intent of the study, it was demonstrated that training of pilots

in simulator situations may improve General Aviation pilot communications.

Morrow and Rodvold (1998)

Researchers provided an exceptionally detailed account of the current status of

communication in ATC operations. Research data in the literature involved NASA

Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS) forms, direct observation of routine operations

of randomly sampled ATC communications, full-mission simulation studies, and

modeling communication processes. The NASA forms were highlighted as a way for

pilots to anonymously report about potential problems in the air traffic system. These

forms also provide a way for pilots to confess system deviations and avoid reprimand,

unless the pilot knowingly violated Federal Aviation Regulations. Factors in ATC

communications were categorized as perceptual, linguistic, and collaborative. ATC

facility communications were compared and contrasted to controller-to-pilot interactions.

Messages could be misinterpreted due to the expectations, level of fatigue, experience,

and age of the receiver.

Possible Sampling Techniques

When choosing participants for my study, it will be important to get a

representative sample of the speech community of aviation English users. There are

several ways in which I could approach this endeavor.

Berns Prelim 9

I could choose critical case sampling which Patton (1990, p. 182) describes as a

method which “Permits logical generalization and maximum application of information

to other cases because if it's true of this one case it's likely to be true of all other cases.”

Another option is maximum variation sampling which “Documents diverse

variations and identifies important common patterns.”A similar but bolder alternative is

extreme or deviant case sampling characterized as “Learning from highly unusual

manifestations of the phenomenon of interest” (Marshall and Rossman, 1999, p. 78).

Following are example of possible applications for these sampling techniques in

an aviation communications setting. In using critical case sampling I could focus on

communications from airports which have busy international traffic with a high volume

of non-native English speaking pilots. The large volume of international traffic would

make miscommunications due to language constraints or lack of English proficiency

more probable than in airport facilities where international traffic is limited.

Maximum variation sampling would take a broader approach such as utilized in

the study by Douglas and Myers detailed later in this paper. In looking at English

proficiency levels, speakers at low, medium, and high performance categories could be

compared to find emergent patterns across levels.

Extreme or deviant case sampling could be employed to look at a specific

phenomenon or anomaly in aviation communications. Noble (1997) chose to use this

approach when studying Japanese student pilots in uncontrolled airspace in California's

uncontrolled airspace. With this sampling technique, a study is not generalizable beyond

the specific circumstances, in this instance region or ethnic group; however, important

trends may appear for further study in a broader context.

Berns Prelim 10

Possible Methods of Data Analysis

The collaborative scheme (Clark & Schaefer, 1987) could be used to determine

understanding between participants. (In my study the participants would consist of pilots

and controllers. Like the Directory Assistance Enquiries telephone study, I would code

transactions by content with the presentation phase and acceptance phase.

In the acceptance phase there would be three conditions: presupposing full

understanding, asserting full understanding, and requesting information needed for full

understanding.

I could also utilize Clark & Schaefer's contribution hierarchies:

• Every unit a speaker utters belongs to the presentation phase of some attempted

contribution.

• Every mutually accepted alternation in speakers initiates a new contribution.

• In many contributions, the acceptance phase is accomplished simply by the

same or next speaker continuing on.

• Every acceptance phase must end with a speaker presupposing acceptance by

continuing on.

I could create a taxonomy and coding system for cataloging and analyzing the

corpus based on prior aviation communication literature (Prinzo & Britton, 1993). I

would implement similar categories to those of Kanki & Foushee's (1989) speech act

coding scheme. These categories were specifically designed for aviation communications

and are included in the following example. Like Kanki & Foushee, I would create

definitions to correspond with each category. To more clearly illustrate such a taxonomy,

their coding scheme and definitions are listed below:

Berns Prelim 11

Command: A specific assignment of responsibility by one group member to

another

Observation: Recognizing and/or noting a fact or occurrence relating to the task

Suggestion: Recommendation for a specific course of action

Statement of Intent: Announcement of an intended action by speaker; includes

statements referring to present and future actions but not to previous actions

Inquiry: Request for factual, task-related information; not a request for action

Agreement: A response in concurrence with a previous speech act; a positive

evaluation of a prior speech act

Disagreement: A response not in concurrence with a previous speech act; a

negative evaluation of a speech act

Acknowledgment: a) Makes known that a prior speech act was heard; b) does not

supply additional information; c) does not evaluate a previous speech act

Answer: Speech act supplying information beyond mere agreement,

disagreement, or acknowledgement

Response Uncertainty: Statement indicating uncertainty or lack of information

with which to respond to a speech act

Tension Release: Laughter or humorous remark

Frustration/Anger/Derisive Comment: Statement of displeasure with self, other

persons, or some aspect of the task; or a ridiculing remark

Embarrassment: Any comment apologizing for an incorrect response

Repeat: Restatement of a previous speech act without prompting

Checklist: Prompts and replies to items on a checklist

Berns Prelim 12

Non-task Related: Any speech act referring to something other than the present

task

Non-codable: Speech act which is unintelligible or unclassifiable with respect to

the present coding scheme

ATC: Flight-crew radio communication with Air Traffic Control, dispatch, "the

company," etc.

Total Communication: Sum of all of the above

Since qualitative studies are emergent, I may find that my categories are not

mutually exclusive or sufficiently encompassing. Because of this, I will need to

continually evaluate my data and be flexible with my coding scheme to make sure that I

best describe the phenomenon.

Discourse Analysis

Depending on the academic discipline and theoretical lens employed by the

researcher, discourse analysis can be interpreted in different ways. Brown and Yule

(1983) offer a good definition of the general process by summarizing, “...the discourse

analyst treats his data as the record (text) of a dynamic process in which language was

used as an instrument of communication in a context by a speaker / writer to express

meanings and achieve intentions (discourse). Working from this data, the analyst seeks to

describe regularities in the linguistic realizations used by people to communicate those

meanings and intentions” (p., 26).

Berns Prelim 13

In regards to sociolinguistics, Stubbs (1983) noted that, “sociolinguistics will have

to incorporate analyses of how conversation works: that is, how talk between people is

organized; what makes it coherent and understandable; how people introduce and change

topics; how they interrupt, ask questions, and give or evade answers; and, in general, how

the conversational flow is maintained or disrupted” (p. 7).

Schiffrin (1994) described discourse in three ways: 1) the formalist view of

discourse as a unit of language above the sentence, 2) the functionalist view of discourse

as language in use, and 3) discourse as utterances or a collection of inherently

contextualized units of language use.

Schiffrin summarized theoretical frameworks and approaches to discourse:

Speech Act Theory

What people do with language.

(Searle and Austin)

Interactional Sociolinguistics

Concerned with culture, society, and language.

(Gumperz, Goffman, and Tannen)

Ethnography of Communications

Use of language in speech situations, events, and acts. Speech acts within speech

events.

(Hymes)

Pragmatics

Concerned with Cooperative Principal (CP) and speaker meaning.

(Grice)

Berns Prelim 14

Conversation Analysis

Derived from ethnomethodology. Analyzes the sequential progression of talk.

(Garfinkel, Goodwin, Schegloff, and Schultz)

Variation Analysis

Systematic investigation of a speech community which attempts to discover

linguistic change and variation.

(Labov)

As recommended by Schiffrin, I would use an interdisciplinary approach

combining the strengths best suited to describing my study from the aforementioned

theoretical frameworks rather than limit my scope to only one disciplinary lens.

Possible Theoretical Frameworks

Functionalism

Aviation communications occur via an interconnected group of systems. Systems

within the aviation industry include but are not limited to: flight crew, air traffic

management facilities, weather reporting facilities, airline dispatch units, and terminal

airport facilities. The structure and interrelated nature of these entities operated within a

functionalist paradigm. Mesthrie (2000) highlighted concepts of functionalism as

culture, socialization, norms and values, and status and role (pp. 29-30).

This order and stability is even reflected in the prescriptivist nature of the register

of aviation English. Not only is phraseology prescribed, but protocol for transactions

between pilots and air traffic controllers is rigid and interdependent on the cooperation of

others operating on the same radio frequency. Since communications can occur only one

way at a time, cooperation within the system is necessary for the efficient operation of

Berns Prelim 15

the larger structure as a whole. The ability to hear transmissions of other aircraft in the

area also promotes a greater understanding of situational awareness allowing pilots to

visualize the movements of local traffic.

Pragmatics

In terms of discourse analysis the researcher is less interested with the inter-

relationship of text than the relationship between speaker and utterance in the context of

use, in other words, what speakers and hearings are doing. This involves reference,

presupposition, implicature, and inference. These pragmatic concepts, along with context,

fall well within the functionalist paradigm as they all imply a common understanding,

conventional meaning, and presupposed expectations that are present in a interrelated

system.

Hymes (1964) stressed context has specific features which he termed addressor,

addressee, audience, topic, setting, channel, code, message-form, event, key, and

purpose. For example if the hearer has a prior knowledge of these elements, especially

addressor, audience, topic, and setting he will have expectations for the speech based on

previous experience. The more knowledge the hearer has, the more constrained these

expectations will be. The terms are intuitive except for “key” which Hymes used to refer

to something which entails evaluation (Brown & Yule, 1983, pp. 27-39).

Perspectivation

Perspectivation takes the idea of context more indepth by “contextualizing actual

events in the framework of relevant backgrounds and conditions.” While grounded in the

discipline of psychology and originating with the model of visual perception, the concept

of perceptivity was expanded to include cognitive functions as well. In linguistic study,

Berns Prelim 16

perspectivization includes the ideas of “having a perspective” or personal point of view,

“taking a perspective” or empathizing with another speaker, and “talking about or from a

perspective” in other words differentiating between ones own point of view and anothers

(Kallmyer, 2002, pp.114-7).

Ensink and Sauer (2003) get more specific and also add the concepts of “frame”

and “footing” to the idea of perspecitivisation. Frame can be used to structure time,

cognitive space, and knowledge. The definition of frame varies slightly between

disciplines and in reference to cognitive psychology the terms schema, demon, or script

may be used to refer to knowledge frames and the processes used for storage, retrieval,

perception, and comprehension. In discourse analysis, these knowledge frames are used to

contextualize perceived meaning. A person's background knowledge can influence that

person's expectations for a given situation.While some researchers consider “footing” just

another instance of “framing” the difference between the two is that “'footing' roughly

refers to the way in which the communicative participant (speaker or hear) is involved in

the situation and the ground for this way” (p. 8).

Interactional Sociolinguistics

Joan Cutting (2000) used an interdisciplinary approach to her longitudinal

research on in-group communications. Her study was primarily concerned with

interactional sociolinguistics (Goffman, 1963; Gumperz, 1982; Tannen, 1989) by

observing the language characteristics of static social group and examining the identities

and relationships of group members. However, she also incorporated theories from

philosophy in utilizing a framework of pragmatics (Grice, 1975; Leech, 1983; Levinson,

1983), ethnomethodological principles of conversation analysis (Garfinkel, 1967;

Berns Prelim 17

Jefferson, 1978; Sacks, 1972; Schegloff, 1968), and structural approach of variation

analysis (Labov, 1972). In utilizing the theoretical frameworks best suited to study the

phenomenon in an interdisciplinary manner, Cutting's study was not forced to be

evaluated by one less suitable disciplinary lens.

Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis

“Ethnomethodology gets at the norms, understandings, and assumptions that are

taken for granted by people in a setting because they are so deeply understood that people

don't even think about why they do what they do” (Patton, 1990, p. 74).

The protocol and routinization of aviation English amongst pilots and controllers

could definitely be viewed with the theoretical lens of ethnomethodology. If a corpora of

naturally occurring aviation communications is obtained for my study, this underlying

framework would be highly suitable to observe the almost reflex like transactions.

Ethnomethodology has also been characterized as assuming meaning and order in

everyday activity. In sociology and linguistics, conversation analysis shares this meaning

and order with basic assumptions according to Person (1999): “1) conversation is

meaningfully organized; 2) there is 'order at all points' in any conversational interaction;

3)conversational utterances are both context-shaped and context renewing; and 4)

everyday conversation is fundamental, so that the structure and organization of

conversation in institutional contexts are adapted from the structure and organization of

everyday conversation” (p. 2).

I believe adding the perspective of conversation analysis could enhance a study of

naturally occurring transactions between pilots and controllers beyond rote categorization

of speech acts and functions to incorporate negotiated meaning and context.

Berns Prelim 18

Collection and Analysis of Data

Depending on the nature of my study, I can collect data in varying manners. If

actual pilot and controller transactions are desired, I could request copies of ATC tapes

for transcription. If a simulation is involved, audio, and ideally video, recordings of

subjects performance would need to be analyzed. If a study similar to Douglas and Myer

(2000) is conducted, follow up interview sessions with subject matter experts evaluating

participants performance would need to be recorded, transcribed, and analyzed.

While occurring in the field of veterinary medicine, the methodology of the

aforementioned study could be transferred to examine professional discourse in aviation.

According to Douglas and Myers (2000)

“...professional development is just a specialized form of socialization, a

general process long recognized as the vehicle through which culturally specific

language, discourse, cognition, and skills are transmitted and developed through

social interaction. Competent professionals are able to articulate assessments of

language performances to colleagues and to the persons being assessed, the

criteria employed, and ways in which a performance might be improved. The

criteria are accessible to researchers primarily by means of an analysis of the

discourse in which they are displayed, and therefore the researchers will need to

engage in very careful study of the assessment interaction and discourse in the

target language use situation, with help from discourse analysts and from

specialists in the target field” (p. 61).

Berns Prelim 19

Transferring this concept to observations of aviation phraseology performance of

student pilots in crew resource management (CRM) simulations could provide a new

contribution to the aviation education, communications, and flight training literature.

Whether gathering data from actual ATC tapes, constructed transactions via

student performance flight simulation, or interviews with subject matter focus groups,

transcriptions will need to be made from audio and/or video recordings. There are many

different conventions for transcription of recordings of naturally occurring speech and

interview data. A good general guide is provided in the transcription design principles

suggested by DuBois (1991):

Category definition

• Define transcriptional categories which make the necessary distinctions

among discourse phenomena.

• Define sufficiently explicit categories.

• Define sufficiently general categories.

• Contrast data types.

Accessibility

• Use familiar notations.

• Use motivated notations.

• Use easily learned notations.

• Segregate unfamiliar notations.

• Use notations which maximize data access.

• Maintain consistent appearance across modes of access

Berns Prelim 20

Robustness

• Use widely available characters.

• Avoid invisible contrasts.

• Avoid fragile contrasts.

Economy

• Avoid verbose notations.

• Use short notations for high frequency phenomena.

• Use discriminable notations for word-internal phenomena.

• Minimize word-internal notations.

• Use space meaningfully.

Adaptability

• Allow for seamless transition between degrees of delicacy.

• Allow for seamless integration of user-defined transcription categories.

• Allow for seamless integration of presentation fixtures.

• Allow for seamless integration of indexing information.

• Allow for seamless integration of user-defined coding information.

Interview and Small Group Discussion Techniques

If my study follows the methodology of Douglas and Myer (2000) I would need to

conduct follow up small group discussions with subject matter experts. Gilbert (1993)

finds this technique valuable for consensus formation. This could be extremely helpful

when interviewing professionals with similar backgrounds as the group dynamics would

contribute to a more indepth understanding of phenomenon.

Berns Prelim 21

In recording the group discussions, it is important to consider microphone

placement in order to clearly capture of all participants dialogue. Notes about individual

participants utterances during the interview session may help later in coding of patterns

and themes. Video recordings can help to match speakers with utterances in the event that

several speakers have similar voices.

A formal interview guide would not be necessary in a study modeled after that of

Douglas and Myer (2000) as the viewing of student performance videos would guide the

discussion. In order to limit interviewer bias, it would be best to limit interaction with

subject matter experts, unless prodding and probing are necessary to illicit dialogue or the

group needs to regain focus.

Survey Data

Instruments such as NASA's ASRS forms are an example of existing survey data.

In the event that I choose to do an analysis of existing data, access would need to be

gained via the proper authorities. Limitations occur in using existing data as the data

collected may not appropriately address my research question. In the instance of ASRS

forms, data is de-identified and chunked into categories deemed useful by NASA for

analysis. If I need to gather data more specific to my own area of study, a survey

instrument may need to be created.

Ary, Jacobs, and Razavieh (1996) devoted an entire chapter to the best practices

for creation of survey instruments, modes of gathering data, selection of samples, and

appropriate statistical analysis. Depending on the goals of the study, an appropriate

instrument, typically an interview guide or questionnaire, would need to be developed

and pilot tested with a small group of subject matter experts to insure the validity and

Berns Prelim 22

reliability of the survey. This method is most appropriate for gaining large scale

information that is highly generalizable to the target population.

Conclusion

The nature of my research question will determine the best means of inquiry for

my dissertation. This paper has helped me to uncover different techniques which have

been employed in aviation research. I have also explored research methods and

theoretical frameworks from other academic areas. I believe the best approach for my

study will ultimately entail a multidisciplinary approach to research such as that of

Cutting (2000) which sought to borrow ideology from those fields which best addressed

her research agenda and provided the richest academic theoretical lens.

Berns Prelim 23

References

Ary, D., Jacobs, L.C., & Razavieh, A.(1996). Introduction to research in education (5th

ed.). Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace.

Brown, G., & Yule, G. (1983). Discourse Analysis. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge

University Press.

Churcher, G. E., Atwell, E. S. & Souter, C. (1997). The semantic/pragmatic annotation of

an air traffic control corpus for use in speech recognition. In Ljung & Magnus

(Eds.), Corpus-based studies in English: Papers from the seventeenth

international conference on English language research on computerized corpora

(ICAME 17) Stockholm, May 15-19, 1996 (pp. 353-373). Amsterdam: Rodopi.

Clark, H. H. & Schaefer, E. F. (1987). Collaborating on contributions to conversations.

Language and Cognitive Processes, 2(1), 19-41.

Cutting, J. (2000). Analysing the language of discourse communities. Kidlington, UK:

Elsevier Science.

Douglas, D. (2000). Assessing language for specific purposes. Cambridge, UK:

Cambridge University Press.

Douglas, D., & Myers, R. (2000). Assessing the communication skills of veterinary

students: Whose criteria? In Konnan, A. (Ed.), Fairness and validation in

language assessment: Selected papers from the 19th language testing research

colloquium, Orlando, Florida. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Edwards, J. A.,& Lampert, M.D. (Eds.). (1993). Talking data: Transcription and coding

in discourse research. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Berns Prelim 24

Ensink, T., & Sauer, C. (Eds.). (2003). Framing and perspectivising in discourse.

Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.

Gall, M. D., Gall, W. R., & Gall, J. P. (1996). Educational research: An introduction (6th

ed.). White Plains, NY: Longman.

Gilbert, N. (Ed.) (1993). Researching social life. London: Sage.

Kallmeyer, W. (2002). Verbal practices of perspective grounding. In Graumann, C. F., &

Kallmeyer, W. (Eds.). Perspective and perspectivation in discourse. Amsterdam,

The Netherlands: John Benjamins.

Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (1999). Designing qualitative research (3rd ed.).

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Mesthrie, R., Swann, J., Deumert, A., & Leap, W. L. (2000). Introducing

Sociolinguistics. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.

Morrow, D., & Rodvold, M. (1998). Communications issues in Air Traffic Control. In M.

K. Smolensky & E. S. Stein (Eds.), Human factors in Air Traffic Control (pp.

421-456). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Morrow, D. G., Rodvold, M. & Lee, A. (1994). Nonroutine transactions in controller-

pilot communication. Discourse Processes, 17(2), 235-258.

Morrow, D. G. & Prinzo, O. V. (1999). Improving pilot/ATC voice communication in

general aviation. Washington, D.C.: FAA Office of Aviation Medicine. (NITS

No. DOT/FAA/AM-99/21).

Berns Prelim 25

Noble, C. E. (1997). The aviation English problem in America: Can a real-time based

flight simulator help? Paper presented at the Excellence in Aviation Award

Centers of Excellence Program Office, Atlantic City: NJ.

Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Newbury

Park, CA: Sage.

Person, R. F. Jr. (1999). Structure and meaning in conversation and literature. Lanham,

MD: University Press of America.

Philips, D. (1991). Linguistic security in the syntactic structures of air traffic control

English. English World-Wide, 12(1), 103-124.

Prinzo, O. V. (1998). An analysis of voice communication in a simulated approach

control environment. Oklahoma City, OK: FAA Civil Aeromedical Institute.

(NITS No. DOT/FAA/AM-97/17).

Prizno, O. V. (2001). Data-linked pilot reply time on controller workload and

communication in a simulated terminal option. Oklahoma City, OK: FAA Civil

Aeromedical Institute. (NITS No. DOT/FAA/AM-01/8).

Prinzo, O. V. & Britton, T. W. (1993). ATC/pilot voice communications: A survey of the

Literature. (NTIS No. DOT/FAA/AM-93/20).

Schiffrin, D. (1994). Approaches to discourse. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.

Stubbs, M. (1983). Discourse analysis: The sociolinguistic analysis of natural language.

Chicago: The University Press of Chicago.

Varantola, K. (1989). Natural language vs. purpose-built languages: The human factor.

Neuphilologische Mitteilungen, 90(2), 173-183.