حسین حیدری تبریزی

The study of the symbiotic relationship between language and culture, along with the call for a rigorous theory and systematic investigative framework, has been a longstanding pursuit. In the past decade or so, Sharifian’s Cultural Linguistics (CL) has demonstrated its potential as a robust theoretical framework and a sharply honed investigative, analytical instrument with a multidisciplinary origin (including English as an International Language (EIL) to explore the interplay between language and culture. The present paper aimed at reviewing the applications of the CL approach and methodology in language-related studies. Arguing for the evolving role of culture in language education and research in the era of (post)digital revolution, this paper attempted to demonstrate the insights the theoretical and analytical frameworks of CL could bring to the realm of language teaching and learning. In so doing, as a starting point, the paper provides a concise overview of the principles and practices of the relatively novel interdisciplinary field of CL. First, the theoretical frameworks of the CL approach are described. This is followed by an explanation of the analytical frameworks of the CL methodology. Finally, some critical reflections on the CL’s approach and methodology are offered. This synopsis is then followed by a state-of-the-art account of the application of CL in language-related studies in the era of (post)digital revolution. The paper concludes with the future directions in such an interdisciplinary venture.

With the advancement of new teaching methods and approaches in foreign language teaching and learning, critical thinking has gained popularity in modern language education. This quasi-experimental study evaluated the possible impact of synthesizing critical thinking dispositional features and action learning on the Iranian intermediate EFL students’ argumentative composition improvement skills. From the 400 EFL learners at Islamic Azad University, Kurdistan branch, one hundred and fifty mingled intermediate-level EFL university learners were chosen based on their scores received from the OQPT and equally distributed into three experimental and two control groups. All participants were given two standard writing tests during the pre and post-treatment phases, followed by CCTST principles. In EG1, the researcher taught argumentative writing based on critical thinking dispositional features; in EG2, he taught argumentative writing based on the principles of action learning approach; and in EG3, he taught argumentative writing by synthesizing critical thinking dispositional features and the principles of action learning approach. Two control groups received conventional writing instruction: one group consisted of only males (EG1), and the other only females (EG2). The study's results revealed that while the participants in both The EGs and CGs elicited a statistically important development in the posttests, those in the three EGs all outperformed those in the CGs. In the order of significance, critical thinking dispositional features, then action learning approach and lastly synthesizing critical thinking dispositional features and action learning approach had a meaningful impact on improving the argumentative essay writing skills of Iranian intermediate EFL students.