Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer


Vol. 14 No. 1 (2023): University didactics, innovation and inclusion. Assessment and feedback

Stereotypes and prejudices in the Italian L2 class. A conversation analysis of their emergence in teachers’ talk

January 25, 2023


The paper explores teachers’ interactional uses of stereotypes and prejudices in the Italian L2 classroom. Drawing from video-ethnographic research in a voluntary association, this study adopts a discursive approach to stereotypes and prejudices, analyzing their pragmatic uses during classroom activities. Even though previous literature has mostly argued against these social devices, the analysis illustrates that teachers make use of stereotypes and prejudices to pursue their local aims in the classroom. Specifically, teachers mobilize stereotyped talk to achieve specific social and didactic aims (e.g., to explain a lexical items or to prompt laughter). In the discussion, we critically consider the risks and opportunities of this kind of practice and advance few implications for teachers’ professional practice, arguing for the relevance of video-based teacher training.


  1. Allport G. W. (1954). The Nature of Prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
  2. Antaki C. and Widdicombe S. (1998). Identity as achievement and as a tool. In Antaki, C. and Widdicombe, S., a cura di, Identities in talk. London: Sage, 1-14.
  3. Bakhtin M. (1984). Problems of Dostoevsky’s poetics. Minneapolis: Minneapolis UP.
  4. Billig M. (1985). Prejudice, categorization and particularization: From a perceptual to a rhetorical approach. European Journal of Social Psychology, 15(1): 79-103. DOI: 10.1002/ejsp.2420150107.
  5. Burdelski M. (2013). Socializing children to honorifics in Japanese: Identity and stance in interaction. Multilingua, 32(2): 247-273.
  6. Caronia L. (2002). Langage et construction sociale de l’ethnicité. Une étude sur la mise en discours de l’élève en tant qu’«élève étranger». Spirale. Revue de recherches en éducation, 30: 123-142.
  7. Caronia L. and Bolognesi I. (2015). Costruire le differenze: immagini di straniero nei contesti educativi. In Nigris E., a cura di, Pedagogia e didattica interculturale. Culture, contesti, linguaggi. Milano: Pearson, 67-99.
  8. Caronia L. and Nasi, N. (2021). Language, Interaction, and Culture at School: an Overview. In Caronia L., a cura di, Language and Social Interaction at Home and School. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 193-220.
  9. Cekaite A. (2012). Affective stances in teacher–novice student interactions: Language, embodiment, and willingness to learn in a Swedish primary classroom. Language in Society, 41: 641-670.
  10. Corsi M. (2017). Pedagogia generale e pedagogia interculturale: epistemologie, intersezioni e prospettive. In Loiodice I. and Ulivieri S., a cura di, Per un nuovo patto di solidarietà. Il ruolo della pedagogia nella costruzione di percorsi identitari, spazi di cittadinanza e dialoghi interculturali. Bari: Progedit, 40-51.
  11. Dann H.D. (1990). Subjective theories: A new approach to psychological research and educational practice. In Semin G. and Gergen K., a cura di, Everyday understanding: Social and scientific implications. London: Sage, 227-244.
  12. van Dijk T.A. (1984). Prejudice in discourse: an analysis of ethnic prejudices in cognition and conversation. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
  13. Duff P.A. (2012). Second Language Socialization. In Duranti A. Ochs E. and Schieffelin B., a cura di, The handbook of language socialization. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 564-586.
  14. Duranti A. (1997). Linguistic Anthropology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  15. Fedeli L. and Rossi P.G., a cura di (2017). Integrating Video into Pre-Service and In-Service Teacher Training. Hershley, PA: IGI global.
  16. Gabrielli S., Szpunar G. and Livi S. (2020). Ridurre il pregiudizio implicito in classe per favorire l’inclusione: un percorso di formazione con gli insegnanti pre-servizio. Education Sciences & Society, 1: 140-158.
  17. Gardner R. (2019). Classroom Interaction Research: The State of the Art. Research on Language and Social Interaction 52(3): 212-226.
  18. Glenn P. (2003). Laughter in Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  19. Goffman E. (1974). Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. New York: Harper & Row.
  20. Jefferson G. (2004). Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. In Lerner, G., a cura di, Conversation Analysis. Studies from the first generation. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: Benjamins, 13-31.
  21. Jensen T., Reeh N., Nøddeskou M.H., Bulian G. and Lapis G. (2018). Linee guida su pregiudizi e stereotipi nelle religioni. SORAPS, Study of religions against prejudices and stereotypes, 3.
  22. Maynard D. (2006). Ethnography and Conversation Analysis: What is the Context of an Utterance? In Hesse-Biber S. and Leavy P., a cura di, Emergent Methods in Social Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 55-94.
  23. McGrady P.B. and Reynolds J.R. (2013). Racial Mismatch in the Classroom: Beyond Black-white Differences. Sociology of Education, 86(1): 3-17.
  24. Petitjean C. and González-Martínez E. (2015). Laughing and smiling to manage trouble in French-language classroom interaction. Classroom Discourse, 6(2): 89-106.
  25. Potter J. and Wetherell M. (1987). Discourse and social psychology. Beyond attitudes and behavior. London: SAGE.
  26. Pugliese R. (2005). Constructing the other: discursive processes in academic and social labelling. In Herrlitz, W., Maier, R., a cura di, Dialogues in and around multicultural schools. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer, 187-206.
  27. Rees D.K. (2002). Facing Up to Stereotypes in the Second Language Classroom. The Internet TESL Journal, 7.
  28. Riley T. and Ungerleider C. (2012). Self-fulfilling Prophecy: How Teachers' Attributions, Expectations, and Stereotypes Influence the Learning Opportunities Afforded Aboriginal Students. Canadian Journal of Education, 35(2): 303-333.
  29. Rubini A. (2022). Movimenti migratori e educazione interculturale. Education Sciences & Society, 1: 203-219.
  30. Sacks H. (1979). Hotrodder: a revolutionary category. In Psathas, G., a cura di, Everyday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology. New York: Irvington, 7-14.
  31. Sacks H. (1992). Lectures on Conversation, vols. I and II. Blackwell, Oxford.
  32. Stivers T., and Rossano F. (2010). Mobilizing response. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 43(1): 3-31.
  33. Tajfel H. (1982). Human groups and social categories. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.
  34. Tran M.T., Young R. L. and Di Lella J.D. (1994). Multicultural Education Courses and the Student Teacher: Eliminating Stereotypical Attitudes in our Ethnically Diverse Classroom. Journal of Teacher Education, 45(3).
  35. Vygotsky L.S. (2012 [1934]). Thought and Language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  36. Wertsch J. (2007). Mediation. In H. Daniels M. Cole and J. Wertsch, a cura di, The Cambridge Companion to Vygotsky. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 178-192.
  37. Zoletto D. (2012). Dall’intercultura ai contesti eterogenei. Presupposti teorici e ambiti di ricerca pedagogica. Milano: FrancoAngeli.


Metrics Loading ...