درخت حوزه‌های تخصصی

تکرار فعالیت آموزشی عامل مهمی در پیچیدگی، دقت و روانی زبانی تولید سخن به شمار می رود. برای اینکه نقش تکرار فعالیت آموزشی منجر به ارائه تئوری گردد ضروری است که نقش متغیرهای بین افراد مدنظر قرار گیرد. بررسی اخیر به بررسی اینکه چگونه تکرار فعالیت آموزشی با سطح بسندگی زبانی رابطه دارد و اینکه چگونه تکرار فعالیت آموزشی بر جنبه های مختلف زبانی تاثیر می گذارد انجام گرفت.بدین منظور 50 زبان آموز با سطوح مختلف سطح بسندگی زبانی از دو مرکز آموزشی انتخاب گردیدند. از شرکت کنندگان خواسته شد که فعالیتی را با دو هفته فاصله بیان کنند. نتایج تحقیق بیانگر این موضوع بود که شرکت کنندگان با سطح بسندگی بالاتر، در مقایسه با شرکت کنندگان با سطح بسندگی پایین تر، تولید شفاهی آنها از پیچیدگی، روانی و دقت بیشتری در مرحله دوم تولید برخوردار بود.

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

در رمان بازتاب دق، که ناباکف به سال 1947 نوشت، نویسنده استبداد و فشار حکومتی را زیر سوال می برد و در پوشش استعاری- تفسیری انتقاد از حاکمیتی زورگو می کند که در راس مملکتی قرار دارد و ترجمه و مترجم را به خدمت استبداد خود در می آورد. بدین ترتیب هملت، اثر ادبی معروف شکسپیر به خاطر مقبول قرار گرفتن در نزد قدرتمندی خودکامه، مورد شکنجه و عذاب مترجم قرار می گیرد و ماهیت اصلی اش را از دست داده و تبدیل به متنی کاملا تحریف شده می گردد. ناباکف با بازی با کلمات نشان می دهد که چگونه ترجمه فقط یک عامل برقراری ارتباط بین مردم نیست بلکه کاری است زیبا شناختی در برگردان گفتمان یک نویسنده که نیاز به تعهد مترجم دارد.

Despite the general findings that address the positive contribution of teaching pragmatic features to interlanguage pragmatic development, the question as to the most effective method is far from being resolved. Moreover, the potential of literature as a means of introducing learners into the social practices and norms of the target culture, which underlie the pragmatic competence, has not been fully explored. This study, then, set out to investigate the possible contribution of plays, as a medium of instruction, to the pragmatic development through either explicit or implicit mode of instruction. To this end, 80 English-major university students were assigned to four experimental groups: two literary and two nonliterary groups. One of the literary groups (Implicit Play) received typographically enhanced plays containing the speech acts of apology, request, and refusal and the other (Explicit Play) received the same treatment in addition to the metapragmatic instruction on the acts. The medium of instruction for the nonliterary groups were dialogs containing the given functions; they were also given either enhanced input (Implicit Dialog) or input plus metapragmatic information (Explicit Dialog). Analyses of the four groups’ performance on a Written Discourse Completion Test (WDCT) before and after the treatment did not show any advantage for the literary medium, i.e., there was no significant difference between literary and nonliterary groups. It was rather the mode of instruction that mattered most, where explicit groups outperformed their implicit counterparts. These findings indicate that even though implicit teaching, that is, exposure to enhanced input followed by some awareness-raising tasks, is effective in pragmatic development, it cannot contribute so much to learning as can the explicit instruction