درخت حوزه‌های تخصصی

The significance of error analysis for the learner، the teacher and the researcher is now widely recognized. Earlier studies of error analysis concentrated on intersystematic comparison of the “native language” and the “target language” and drew the required data largely from intuitions and impressionistic observations. This study was conducted on the basis of the following observations: (1) to restrict to the study of one area viz articles. (2) to avoid comparison in terms of the systems of native and target language. In this study the major areas of difficulties that students face in the target language، i.e. the occurrence of articles in different syntactic features was examined and an attempt was made to establish a hierarchy of difficulties 40 undergraduates faced in the use of articles. For testing the correct retrieval، a slightly modified version of Leacok’s essay ‘My Financial Career’ was prepared. It included sufficient examples of almost all the important uses of articles. The test was given to the subjects in the form of a running text. The responses of the subjects were analysed in terms of noun or noun phrases preceded by articles، noun or noun-phrases preceded by no article، and grammatical categories other than noun or noun-phrases proceeded by no article. The findings revealed that most of the errors the students committed were due to the nature as well as the grammatical complexity of the articles in English، i.e. L1 independent which cannot be explained in terms of transfer from the native language. It was also found that students’ competence using anaphoric reference is far greater than using cataphoric reference. The findings are interpreted to have pedagogical implications for syllabus designers and EFL teachers.

"با ترویج روش های برقراری ارتباط گرایش به ""واقعیت"" در آموزش زبان ابعاد گسترده تری یافته است. روش های یاد شده نه تنها تاکید بر استفاده از منابع واقعی زبان در کنار منابع آموزشی دارند بلکه استفاده ای واقعی و طبیعی از این منابع و همچنین استفاده از زبان در موقعیت طبیعی و غیرتصنعی را نیز مد نظر دارند. منابع واقعی زبان با وجود امتیازات فراوان (تنوع شکلی، اطلاعات غنی) نیاز مبرم به برنامه ریزی آموزشی و درسی با در نظر گرفتن مخاطبین زبان آموز دارند. این منابع از همان ابتدای آموزش و در سطوح مبتدی می توانند با طرح تمرینات و فعالیت های مناسب مورد استفاده قرار گرفته و زبان آموز را برای روبرویی با واقعیت زبان آماده سازد. گروهی بودن این تمرینات و فعالیت ها احساس امنیت خاطر به تک تک اعضای گروه داده، نتیجه کار را بهبود می بخشد و موقعیت طبیعی برای کاربرد زبان مورد آموزش را در تبادلات گروهی ایجاد می کند. بدین ترتیب بکارگیری زبان به گونه ای واقعی و طبیعی جایگزین مکالمات مصنوعی در موقعیت های تخیلی که توسط متدهای سمعی و بصری رایج شده و کم و بیش در آموزش ما با روش های برقراری ارتباط باقی مانده است خواهد شد.

This study examined the differences among high، mid and low ambiguity tolerance groups in their reading comprehension ability and their metacognitive awareness of reading strategies. To this end، 123 first-year college students majoring in Engineering with an age range of 19-25 were stratified into three groups of high، mid and low ambiguity tolerance to participate in the study. They took part in the Nelson test of proficiency and a reading comprehension test and also filled out two questionnaires: the Metacognitive Awareness of Reading Strategies Inventory، and the Tolerance of Ambiguity Scale. The results showed significant differences between Low and High groups. That is، high ambiguity tolerance students scored higher on reading comprehension test، displayed higher metacognitive awareness of reading strategies، and showed higher perceived use of Global and Problem-Solving metacognitive reading strategies. However، no significant differences were found between the middle group and the other two groups in these variables. Also، no significant difference was found in the use of Supportive strategies among these three groups. The findings are interpreted to have implications for syllabus designers and EFL teachers.

The main West Iranian languages، i.e. Old Persian، Parthian، Middle Persian، New Persian and – in some respects – Avestan، may be studied in a uniquely continuous development stretching over close to 3 000 years. These languages are not only the result of their genetic inter-relations but also of their cultural، religious and political history. They may be labelled ‘high languages’ (‘Hochsprachen’)، in the sense that they are cultured and standardized and used for a great number of purposes by people of various linguistic backgrounds. This article presents an over-view of their development seen from a specific perspective. The traditional Iranian walled-in garden، the pairi-daēzaof the Avesta، is used as a metaphor for a high language in contrast to the free vegetation of spontaneous human speech in social interaction. The latter is here called ‘dialect’، a concept that includes both ‘geolect’ and ‘sociolect’. These high language ‘gardens’ are thus viewed as a kind of cultural artefacts. Among other things، this has implications for views on the dichotomy literacy/orality، showing that writing is not language and that ‘orality’ belongs both to ‘high language’ and ‘dialect’. It is furthermore argued that literacy and orality were present in complementary distribution throughout the whole known history of the Iranian cultural sphere.

This study was an attempt to determine the effect of task-based approach vs. traditional approach on the narrative and expository writing of the Iranian EFL learners. There were two control groups as well as two experimental ones in the current study. In the two control groups namely G1 and G2 narrative and expository writing were taught respectively using the traditional approach. Whereas، in the two experimental groups، namely G3 and G4 narrative and expository writing were taught respectively on the basis of task-based approach. After the treatment، a narrative writing post-test was given to the two narrative groups (G1 and G3) and an expository writing post-test was given to the two expository groups (G2 and G4). Data analysis showed that experimental groups outperformed control groups. So it was concluded that task-based approach was more effective in teaching narrative and expository writing compared to the traditional approach. It was also found that although there was a difference between the narrative and expository experimental groups (G3 and G4) in favor of the narrative group، this difference was not statistically significant