درخت حوزه‌های تخصصی

In light of the fact that L2 pronunciation errors are often caused by the transfer of well-established L1 sound systems, this paper examines some of the outstanding phonological differences between Persian and English. Comparing segmental and supra-segmental aspects of both languages, this study also discusses several problematic areas of pronunciation facing Iranian learners of English. To reach such a goal, thirty EFL learners were randomly selected from three levels of beginning, intermediate, and advanced students enrolled for the Fall term in 2008 in one of the private institutes in Shiraz. Their pronunciations of a list of 40 words and 8 sentences were analyzed through read-aloud task followed by an interview. The words have been recorded though a computer-based files adjusted for voice. The result of the data analysis indicated that our EFL learners at three levels confront considerable problems in areas that are absent in their mother tongue or converged into one item which is technically termed as coalescence. In order to compensate for the difficulties encountered by our EFL learners, we as teachers should integrate pronunciation teaching in our classroom syllabi so that they will become conscious of the differences in the sound system of the two languages. In this way, the Persian learners of English will be helped to become proficient speakers of English with rare or no residue of foreign accent in the pronunciation of target words, phrases, or sentences, thereby leading to more intelligibility of their utterances.

This study compares and contrasts lexical cohesion in English and Persian abstracts of Iranian medical students’ theses to appreciate textualization processes in the two languages. For this purpose, one hundred English and Persian abstracts were selected randomly and analyzed based on Seddigh and Yarmohamadi’s (1996) lexical cohesion framework, a version of Halliday and Hasan’s (1976) and Halliday’s (1985) taxonomies. For contrastive analysis, the SPSS package was used. The results revealed some similarities and differences in the use of lexical cohesion sub-categories in the parallel English and Persian texts. The occurrence of all sub-types is nearly the same in the two groups of texts and the two- tailed t-test employed showed that the differences are not statistically significant. Both languages exhibit a general tendency in using repetition, but synonymy and meronymy are the least used sub-categories. Regarding the density of the texts, the analysis indicates that Persian abstracts are denser than their corresponding English ones.

Halliday’s Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) has stood the test of time as a model of text analysis. The present literature contains a plethora of studies that while taking the ‘clause’ as a unit of analysis have put into investigation the metafunctions in research articles of a single field of study or those of various fields in comparison. Although ‘clause complex’ is another unit of SF analysis, by far there has been only one study on research articles where it was the unit of analysis (Sellami Baklouti, 2011). Therefore, the purpose of this study was to put into analysis the ‘taxis’, ‘expansion’ and ‘projection’ deployed in Applied Linguistics research article abstracts (RAAs) by native (N) and non-native (NN) writers. To this end, 20 Applied Linguistics RAAs (10 by N English writers and 10 by NN English writers on the sub-fields of Discourse Analysis and Language Assessment) were analyzed according to Halliday & Matthiessen’s (2013) ‘clause complex’ framework. The results indicated that there is a significant difference in the use of ‘projection’ by Ns and NNs, while the distribution of ‘taxis’ and ‘expansion’ is the same. The findings also showed what types of ‘taxis’, ‘expansion’ and ‘projection’ were deployed by Ns and NNs

تحقیق حاضر کوششی در جهت یافتن مولفه های فرهنگی پنهان در مجموعه کتب درسی cover to cover از انتشارات اکسفورد می باشد که هم اکنون در برخی دانشگاه های ایران در درس زبان عمومی تدریس می شود. برای انجام تحقیق حاضر از دو شیوه استفاده شد: 1) بررسی کیفی متون خواندنی مجموعه سه جلدی این کتاب با استفاده از تحلیل محتوایی متون ان بر اساس اصالت سنجی متون از جهت گنجاندن ارزش های فرهنگی غربی. در این مرحله بررسی بر روی شش متن ( از هر جلد دو متن) به شکل انتخاب تصادفی صورت گرفت. 2) در مرحله دوم از روش مصابه با ""گروه هدف"" از تجربیات مدرسینی که از این مجموعه کتب در کلاس های درسی خود استفاده کرده بودند بهره گرفته شد. در نهایت بررسی دو مرحله ای نشان از عدم تطابق مفاهیم فرهنگی پنهان موجود در این مجموعه با محیط های فرهنگی و ملی ایرانی داشت. در پایان پیشنهادات نویسنده در راستای ارتقای وضعیت موجود با استناد به افزایش قدرت و آگاهی فرهنگی به مدد اموزش های تحلیلی برای گویندگان غیر بومی زبان بررسی شدند.