مسعود یعقوبی نوتاش

This study attempted to determine the viability of the pedagogic interventions in ESP writing courses that fall within the ambit of Written Corrective Feedback (WCF). Considering this objective, 93 intermediate-level ESP learners in 3 intact classrooms of a medical sciences university in Iran were assigned to three groups. They were provided with corrective feedback; using three feedback strategies comprising direct, indirect, and metalinguistic WCF over ten treatment sessions. The researchers endeavored to itemize the utility of the interventions mentioned above via analyzing the participants’ performance on an immediate and a delayed writing posttest. The results displayed the efficacy of WCF for the betterment of the ESP learners’ writing performance. Furthermore, they accentuated the short-term and long-term supremacy of explicit WCF strategies (i.e., metalinguistic & direct) over the implicit ones (i.e., indirect). The findings might enable syllabus designers and curriculum developers to redress the English courses for students of allied medical sciences.

The present paper seeks to view language through the prism of gender as social practice as delineated by Judith Butler. Following up on the notion of gender as an entity distinguished from biological sex, she tends to base the notion on a set of normalizing practices that determine gender identity. For so doing, she believes that gender is discursively made or constructed performatively. In her view, the social discourse aligns economic power with a manly power structure where women are dismissed altogether. On the other hand, social and linguistic structures are closely inter-related and serve to perpetuate the dominance and imposed gender identity the latter one of which is actualized through imitated performativity. The article also explores dimensions of gendered practice regarding subjectivity and repression. Butler’s views, though quite intriguing for post-structuralists and postmodern scholars, have been criticized on the grounds that it fails to empower women, follow a political agenda, promise any moral basis.

Reaching out to history and subject in terms of meaning variation, Kristeva could show that language cannot simply be a Saussurean sign system. Rather, she went on to delineate that language, beyond signs, is associated with a dynamic system of signification where the ''speaking subject'' is constantly involved in processing. Julia Kristeva, a French critic, psychoanalyst, theoretician, a post-structuralist philosopher of Hungarian origin, dwells upon ideas from linguistics, psychoanalysis, sociology while representing text analysis, sign and subject from emotional and motivational perspectives.  She believes that processing language structure and subject depend upon semiotic and symbolic domains that emerge in the scope of ''signifiance'' process whereby the semiotic domain processes and primary structures against the symbolic realm. In Kristeva''s view, the sign Chora, while being the milieu for energy, dynamism, and motility, shows the internal and signification drives of the language, and will involve changes in signification mutation of subjectivity.  

This paper reports on an investigation of native language-based differential item functioning (DIF) across the subtests of Iranian Undergraduate University Entrance Special English Exam (IUUESEE). Fourteen thousand one hundred seventy two foreign-language test takers (including four groups of Azeri, Persian, Kurdish, and Luri test takers) were chosen for the study. Uniform DIF (UDIF) and Non-uniform DIF (NUDIF) analyses were conducted on data from the four versions of IUUESEE. After establishing the unidimensionality and local independence of the data, DIF findings showed that Luri test takers were more advantaged than other native language groups across the subtests. NUDIF analysis uncovered that almost all subtests functioned in favor of low-ability test takers who haven’t been expected to outperform high-ability test takers. A probable explanation for native language-ability DIF was that Luri and low-ablity test takers were more likely to venture lucky guesses. Thoughtless errors and guessing, test-wiseness, overconfidence, stem length, unappealing distractors, and time were proposed as possible causes of DIF in IUUESEE. It was also found that the reading subtest included the large number of items with significant DIF.