The Comparison of Conversational Structures between Zach Sang and The Radio 1 Breakfast Shows

_________________ Abstract This study focused on a comparison of conversational structures between two talk shows, Zach Sang Show and Radio 1 Breakfast Show. This study is a descriptive qualitative study. It used Zach Sang Show and Radio 1 Breakfast Show on an episode interview with Sam Smith as the object of the study. To analyze the data, the researcher used conversation analysis theory proposed by Schegloff and Sacks (1977). The result of the study revealed that both talk shows applied the structures of opening, closing, adjacency pairs, turn taking, and repairs. There are some similarities and differences between these two talk shows in terms of structures. High involvement style and high considerateness style appear in both shows. However, in Zach Sang Show, the two speakers mostly share the same style which is high considerateness style. In conclusion, there are some differences of conversational structures between Zach Sang Show and Radio 1 Breakfast Show on their interviews with Sam


INTRODUCTION
Conversation occurs when people talk with each other and can be used to indicate any activity of interactive talk regardless of its purpose. (Ten Have, 1999, p.4) Based on this definition, it can be said that conversation is an action by individuals to gather information, make known each other, and fill the needs as a human being living on this earth. Further, this study based on conversation analysis by Schegloff & Sacks (1977). Schegloff & Sacks (1997) identifies major structural of interaction; they are turn-taking, sequence organization, repair, overall structural organization of conversation, word selection, turn organization, and so on.
Besides the casual conversation surround us, we mostly see television, radio, YouTube, and other social media, which shows many conversation forms. A talk show is a television programming or radio programming in which one person or group discusses various topics led by a talk show host. A talk show gains a huge audience because it seems more interactive since we can hear the dialogue between host and guest involves in the show. However, many talk shows nowadays ignore conversational structure and more focus on gaining a big audience than making a successful conversation. Further, two of the most popular talk shows on Radio nowadays are Zach Sang Show and Radio 1 Breakfast Show. Zach Sang Show is considered to be more serious than Radio 1 Breakfast Show since the host of the show is a typically radio host. On the other hand, Radio 1 Breakfast show is hosted by Nick Grimshaw who is humorous. The conversation structure on both talk shows can be compared through the opening, closing, adjacency pairs, turn taking, and repair.
Several studies were referred in this study related to the research on the analysis of conversation structure and the aspect of conversational structure in daily conversation. Some of them were Mandelbaum (1990), Bou-Franch (2001), Demitrijevic (2004, Gafaranga (2005), Luginbuhl (2007), Mazur (2008, Angus, et. al (2012), Zaferanieh (2013), Andriyanto (2014), Pour and Yazd (2015), Khodareza and Asadi (2015), Sofyan and Rahmah (2016), Yuliasri and Karlinda (2016), and Turnbull and Muntigl (20018). In their studies, they revealed that CA studies yield descriptions of recurrent structures and practices of social interaction. Some of them, for instance, turn taking or sequence structure, are involved in all interaction, whereas others are more specific, besides they relate to particular actions, such as asking questions or delivering and receiving information, suggestion, or complaints.
The next previous studies are about speakers" conversational style. Some researcher had conducted this study; they were Deborah (2001), Yuksel (2005), Boonstra (2005), Tanen (2007), Rulitasari (2010), Dewi andSylvia (2012), andWulandari (2015). The result generally showed that a successful of a conversation could be seen by the conversation style used by speakers. Conversational styles are divided into high involvement style and high considerate styles. If two speakers use the same conversation style, the conversation can be said success.
The previous studies could be used as practical guidance for this study since it was relevant in terms of conversation analysis, especially in the application of conversational structure aspects including opening, closing, adjacency pairs, turn taking, repair, and further about conversational style. However, this research was not the same as those above since it compared two different talk shows which had different conversational structure and conversational style among the speakers. Therefore, it implemented to evaluate the similarities and differences between those two talk shows and the implication to the run of the show.
Further, this current study aimed at presenting the comparison of conversational study between Zach Sang Show and Radio 1 Breakfast Show on an interview with Sam Smith.

METHODS
This study is a descriptive qualitative study. It aims to explain conversational structure analysis; as well as the similarities and differences that exist in Zach Sang Show and Radio 1 Breakfast Show in interview with Sam Smith. The object of the study was the conversation in Zach Sang Show and Radio 1 Breakfast Show on an interview with Sam Smith.
In order to collect the data, the researcher used audio, transcript, and worksheet as the main instrument. The worksheets were used to collect the data about the aspects of conversational structure, the similarities and differences of each show, and conversation style aspects. There were five worksheets accordance with research problems mentioned.
After collecting the data, the researcher analyzed the data by identifying the conversational structure aspects applied in both talk shows. The analysis based on Schegloff & Sacks (1973). The researcher focuses on how conversational structures aspect similar and differed in some categories, like appearance and its implication to the flow of conversation. It is also followed by interpreting the result of each unit analysis into words in the discussion part. Lastly, the conclusion is drawn in the end of the chapter.

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
The followings showed the findings and discussion of this research after analyzing the data. This part is divided into five sections based on the research questions of the study.

Conversational Structure Applied in Zach Sang Show
This sub-section discussed how conversational structure applied in Zach Sang Show. Each of conversational aspects will be explained one by one. For a better view of the findings, the overall result of current research can be seen in the provided table below.

Opening
This section discusses the opening of Zach Sang Show. Like other things in conversation, the opening of a conversation between two or more participants must be interactionally achieved.
To begin the talk, the host and the guest use greeting and how-are-you sequences. The dialogue in that talk show shows how the participants open their conversation. They follow the basic and simple way to open a conversation just like how the talk show in general.

Closing
The organization of closing found in this conversation is the kind that the majority of those produced by conversation participants in a talk show. Doing closure through closing implicative environment makes closure relevant and is considered appropriate for the participants due to no need to explicitly talk about the closure as a relevant activity.

Turn-taking Allocation
This segment discusses the allocation of turn-taking found in the dialogue of Zach Sang and Sam Smith. There are three rules of turntaking allocation by Sacks and Schegolf, they are Current -Select -Next (R1), Next Speaker Self-Selects (R2), and No Current Speaker Selects Next & No Next Speaker Self-Selects (R3).
R1 found as the majority rules applied by the speakers when they got their turn to talk in the conversation with the amount of appearance is 68. Next speaker"s self-selection rule applied 63 times by the host and guest of a talk show in their conversation.
The number of its appearances puts this rule in the second rank among all the three turn-taking allocation rules. The next turn taking rule is R3 which was found only 1 in the whole conversation

Adjacency Pair
When two people talked, there will be some turns, and these turns will create pairs. Schegloff and Sacks (1973) called these sorts of paired utterances adjacency pairs, and these adjacency pairs are the basic units on which sequences in conversation are built. There were 69 pairs of adjacency pairs in this research which was divided into nine types of sequences of related utterance. Those types were adviceacceptance, assertion-agreement, farewellfarewell, greeting-greeting, informationresponse, question-answers, requestgrant/acceptance, statement -confirmation, thank-return.

Conversational Repair
Conversational repair helps to sustain social interaction by allowing speakers mutually to handle problems that arise as they communicate. 30 kinds of repairs were found in this research. The highest appearance of the conversational repair was self-initiated self-repair with 25 appearance number. Self-initiated other-repair appeared 4 times. While the type of otherinitiated self-repair only appeared once. Then, the last type of repair, other-initiated otherrepair, was not found at all in this research.

Conversational Structure Applied in Radio 1 Breakfast Show
This sub-section discussed how conversational structure applied in Radio 1 Breakfast Show. Each of conversational aspects will be explained one by one. For a better view of the findings, the overall result of current research can be seen in the provided table below. Smith. This section investigated how the opening of the conversation between Nick Grimshaw and Sam Smith was achieved. The following conversation showed how the participants opened the conversation. To begin the talk, the host and the guest used "greet" and "how-are-you" sequences. All in all, the opening performed by the participants considered as successful, and their conversation could continue further to discuss various topics.

Closing
The organization of closing in this show looks like the majority found in most of talk shows. The closing is appropriate since they say thank one to another even they don"t use farewell like "goodbye" or "see you." However, It is relevant with what closing should be ended.

Turn-taking Allocation
This segment discusses the allocation of turn-taking found in the dialogue of Nick Grimshaw and Sam Smith in Radio 1 Breakfast Show. There are three rules of turn-taking allocation by Sacks and Schegolf, they are Current -Select -Next (R1), Next Speaker Self-Selects (R2), and No Current Speaker Selects Next & No Next Speaker Self-Selects (R3).
The first rule found as the majority rules applied by the speakers when they got their turn to talk in the conversation. The amount of appearance of R1 was 108. Next speaker"s selfselection rule applied 112 times by the host and guest of the talk show in their conversation. The number of its appearances puts this rule in the first rank among all the three turn-taking allocation rules. The next turn taking rule is R3, which was found only 1 in the whole conversation.

Adjacency Pairs
There were 99 pairs of adjacency pairs in this research which was divided into 11 types of sequences of related utterance. Those types were greeting-greeting, information-response, question-answers, request-grant/acceptance, statement -confirmation, complaint-response, offer-acceptance, call-beckon, compliment-acceptance, assertion-agreement, thank-return. The mostly used pair in the conversation is question-answer. It is due to the kind of conversation was a talk show.

Conversational Repair
Fifteen repairs were found in this research. The highest appearance of the conversational repair was self-initiated self-repair with ten appearance number. Self-initiated other-repair appeared three times. While the type of otherinitiated self-repair only appeared twice. Then, the last type of repair, other-initiated otherrepair, was not found at all in this research.

Similarities of The Aspects of Conversation Structure in Zach Sang Show and Radio Breakfast Show
There were many similarities of conversational structure found between those two talk shows. The similarities can be seen from three criteria; they were the existence of conversational structure aspects, the occurrences of conversational structure aspects, and the response of someone"s talk. All conversational structures aspects appeared in both two talk shows. The occurrence of turn-taking rule was almost the same. There were also many types of adjacency pairs which were the same between two talk shows. Further, the same three types of repair appeared on these two talk shows. The response coming from interlocutor was considered to be the same either it was acceptance or refusal.

Differences of Conversational Structure between Zach Sang Show and Radio 1 Breakfast Show
There were also many differences in conversational structure found between those two talk shows. The differences can be seen from three criteria; they were the existence of conversational structure aspects, the occurrences of conversational structure aspects, and the response of someone"s talk. The occurrence of turn-taking R1 and R2 was different. There were also many differences in the occurrence of some adjacency pairs between two talk shows. The high appearance one repair and less in another caused the difference in interlocutor"s response. The response from the speaker in perceived the interlocutor also caused the difference since the response was acceptance in one talk show and refusal in another.

Conversation Style in Zach Sang Show and Radio 1 Breakfast Show
Based on the table above, two speakers of talk show 1 showed the characteristic of the high of considerateness style. It was proved by the slower speech/ words per minutes, slower turntaking while there were only 80 and 79 turns in more than 20 minutes conversation. Additionally, there were only a few overlaps occurred, which means each speaker wait for each other while talking. On the other hand, the speakers of the second talk show showed two different characteristic of conversational style. Speaker 1 used high involvement style while speaker 2 used high considerateness style. Speaker 1 seemed used faster rate of speech, faster turn taking, less inter-turn pauses, and frequent overlaps. However, speaker 2 used slower speech, slower turn taking, longer pauses between turns, and avoidance of overlaps.
Based on this result, Zach Sang Show on an interview with Sam Smith was more successful than The Radio 1 Breakfast Show on an interview with Sam Smith. Two speakers share the same conversational style, which is high considerateness style.

CONCLUSION
Based on the findings and discussions above, the researcher concluded that two conversations already include all the aspect required for a good conversation. Some of the aspects discussed here are opening, closing, adjacency pairs, turn taking, and conversational repair. Furthermore, from the conversation of two talk shows, it can be drawn some similarities and differences. They can be seen from its appearance of each conversation structure aspects and the implication of them to the flows of conversation. The responses of each speaker talks also become a concern. In addition, according to Tannen (1989), the most successful conversations occur when two speakers use similar conversational styles. So that Zach Sang Show on an interview with Sam Smith was more successful than The Radio 1 Breakfast Show on an interview with Sam Smith. Two speakers share the same conversational style, which is high considerateness style.
Practically, the next talk show speakers must concern not only on the organizational of conversational structure but also the conversation style they use. It is important for them to make the conversation goes well and keep the atmosphere of talk show itself. Pedagogically, this study provides an essential example for enlightening students how to keep the conversation going. This can improve their skill in speaking as well as its conversation structure.
However, this study has a limitation since the findings of this study is generated from two talk shows. The similarities and differences of conversational structures in other talk shows will be different.