نسرین حدیدی

This study aimed at determining the effect of teaching idiom strategies, that is, socializing learning and cognitive linguistic approach, on Iranian EFL learners' recognition and production of ambiguous idioms. To this end, 78 upper-intermediate students of Islamic Azad University, Tabriz Branch, Iran, formed the total population of the study. Then, Proficiency English Test (PET) was administered to ensure the homogeneity of the needed sample. Based on the results of this test, 60 students were selected as the final participants. They were randomly assigned to two experimental groups: WhatsApp socializing group and etymological elaboration group. A pretest was used to ensure the unfamiliarity of the idioms. The criteria for choosing ambiguous idioms were that all ambiguous idioms required to have etymology and could be illustrated using a picture Also, posttests for the recognition and production of ambiguous idioms were used to compare the performance of the two groups. The statistical analysis of results indicated that the etymological elaboration group outperformed the socializing group in both idiom recognition and production. The findings of this research have pedagogical implications for teachers, syllabus designers, and materials developers in using appropriate instructional methods for teaching idioms.

Although a plethora of research endeavors have investigated the rhetorical structure of the Research Articles (RAs) through the lens of move analysis, Move Recycling (MR) across RA sections has remained unnoticed. The current study sought to bridge this gap by exploring cross-disciplinary variations in the recycling of the Objective move (research questions/hypotheses/purposes) across four conventional sections (Introduction, Method, Result, and Discussion) of RAs. To this end, 600 English RAs from four prestigious journals in six soft science disciplines, published between 2006 and 2018, were selected. The quantitative data analysis results revealed that the Objective move’s recycling was sensitive to the disciplinary variations and RA sections. That is, Economics RAs were the main platforms for recycling the Objective move, and Psychology RAs witnessed the least amount of its recycling. Moreover, Objective move recycling was observed most frequently in the Discussion sections and least frequently in the Method sections of RAs. In the study’s qualitative phase, the RA authors’ rationales for MR, which were received via email, underwent content analysis. Based on the recurrent themes in the RA authors’ responses, four main reasons for MR, including editorial policy, readers’ guidance, discipline conventions, and RA length, were identified. This study’s findings might provide a concise view of MR for researchers, teachers, and students in various disciplines. EAP instructors can raise students’ awareness of MR and encourage them to use it in their RAs as a comprehension facilitator.