درخت حوزه‌های تخصصی

The present study investigates the implantation of political science terminology approved by the Academy of Persian Language and Literature (APLL) in the Hamshahri corpus made up of news text from Hamshahri newspaper and their acceptability among MA students of English translation studies (ETS), English literature (EL), and Political science (PS). To conduct this research the frequencies of the political terms approved by the APLL with their competing terms were compiled from the corpus. For analyzing another group of terms without competing terms, 90 MA students were purposively selected from the abovementioned majors. Accordingly, a 60-item 5-point Likert Scale questionnaire (including 60 political terms) along with an open-ended question were administered. The implantation coefficients (IC) of the first group of the terms with competing terms indicate that the factors such as conciseness and derivative capabilities result in higher IC. The descriptive results indicated that around two third of the ETS and EL students agree with the APLL-approved political science terms, while less than half of the PS students accept these neologisms. Moreover, the Chi-Square test (value of 92.000, p= 0.000 < 0.05) revealed that there is a correlation between the level of agreement and the major. In addition, Cramer’s V test result with the value of 0.092 indicated a weak correlation between the academic major and the attitude. Finally, analysis of the open-ended question showed that conciseness, transparency, morphological well-formedness, and familiarity with neologisms were the main reasons for agreeing or disagreeing with them.

This study reports on research article (RA) authors’ definitional understanding and sociocultural perceptions of intertextuality and plagiarism in academic writing. To meet this end, a questionnaire, consisting of three sections, was constructed and emailed to Iranian RA authors who have published in leading international and local applied linguistics journals. The findings of the first two sections suggest that authors recognized the crucial role intertextuality plays in RAs; however, they had a flimsy understanding of the concept and its cultural bearings. On the other hand, unacceptable, as most of these respondents may find it, plagiarism was seen as an unavoidable part of academic research at least in initial steps of academic writing. This was shown to be mainly the function of the authors’ sociocultural perceptions of plagiarism. The third section of the questionnaire addressed the authors’ departure from plagiarism and gradual proximization to intertextuality. The findings imply that plagiarism, intertextuality and their concomitant sociocultural perceptions ought to be discussed, re-examined, and put to trial in local contexts

This study intended to investigate critical thinking-based teaching strategies EFL teachers of Iranian high schools integrate into their teaching. To this purpose, the inter-relationship between the teachers' frequency of use of critical thinking-based teaching strategies and their teaching experience, their attendance at critical thinking in-service training courses, and their higher university degree were explored through a survey questionnaire. To analyze the collected data, means, frequencies, standard deviations, percentages, exploratory factor analysis (EFA), correlation coefficient, and five-point Likert scale were utilized. The obtained results showed that teaching experience was negatively correlated with the frequency of strategy use, and that no significant relationship was found between the frequency of strategy use and teachers’ higher university degree. The results further showed a significant relationship between the frequency of strategy use and critical thinking in-service training courses attended by teachers. The findings of this study imply that critical thinking should be reinforced in Iranian education system as well as in high school teaching schedule.

Classroom performance assessment has gained prominence parallel to the multiplicity of the purposes ahead of assessment. Of many, the major controversy, which was the motive behind this study, is the incorporation of L1-based elicitation as a valid measure of second language (L2) performance assessment. To shed empirical lights on this issue, this explanatory sequential mixed-methods research employed 87 Iranian intermediate EFL learners, whose L2 classroom performance was assessed through L1-based elicitation techniques. In order to validate this mechanism, multi-method mono-trait model (namely, Pearson correlation, structural equations, exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, composite reliability and convergent validity) suggested by Henning and Mesick’s Unitary Concept of validity were applied. The results from these multiple sources of evidence yield support to their common consensus that L1-based elicitation techniques are valid measures of L2 performance assessment. The findings then offer legacy to the educational implications of L1-based mechanisms both in L2 instruction and assessment.

As the use of paper-based portfolios and, more recently, ePortfolios began to attract unprecedent significance in many educational learning contexts, many researchers in the field of second and foreign language learning also begun to look more closely into their effects from diverse aspects. Nevertheless, a small number, if any, have addressed the issue from teachers and students' points of view in a comparative frame. This issue is even more noticeable in the Middle East, where portfolio learning has lately been incorporated in tertiary level studies. Hence, the present study compares students and teachers’ perception of the portfolio component of the English Foundation Program at Sultan Qaboos University in Oman. Seventy eight students and nine teachers participated in the study, where students expressed their ideas through a questionnaire, the teachers were interviewed to see how they perceive the portfolio element of the course. Using a mixed method for data collection and analysis, several chi-square tests were run to see if there is any significant difference between the perceptions of students and teachers. The results show that although the students generally agreed on the usefulness of the component, the teachers believe that it has lost its meaning.

This study examines conceptions of outsiders to the polity, focusing on the lexical items migrant(s), refugee(s), and exile(s) in both internet- and print-based sources. Drawing primarily on a subsection of the Genealogies Internet Corpus consisting of left-wing sources, I argue that left-wing politics is currently caught up in the rhetoric of the right and of mainstream institutions in society, largely reproducing the same discursive patterns even as it sets out to challenge them. Dominant patterns in left-wing Internet sources reveal, for example, that the economic migrant vs. political refugee distinction enforced by mainstream institutions remains largely intact, that the assumption of a “refugee crisis” unfolding in Europe is accepted at face value, and that the left is entangled in the same politics of labeling imposed by the right, reproducing designations such as “undocumented migrants” uncritically. Refugees and migrants, moreover, are represented as victims with no agency, are discussed in legal terms that serve to dehumanize them, and are repeatedly “quantified” as a homogenous and potentially problematic category. Acknowledging the contagious nature of dominant discourses and the difficulty of finding an alternative language with which to argue against established institutional rhetoric, the study further explores historical models that appear more consistent with the values espoused by left-wing politics today. It examines a subcorpus of modern English translations of ancient Greek texts such as Thucydides’ The Peloponnesian War and Herodotus’s Histories to demonstrate the viability of adopting a different conceptualization of refugees and other outsiders to the polity that may be drawn from classical antiquity—and/or from nineteenth- and early twentieth-century receptions of texts originating in classical antiquity—and the possibility of developing an alternative discourse with which to speak about migrants in the present.

Complexity, accuracy, and fluency (CAF) are measures of language proficiency in productive skills. This study with a non-equivalent control group pretest-post-test design explored whether Dynamic Assessment (DA) procedures enhances EFL teachers' writing CAF. Three 22-member groups of homogeneous teachers were randomly assigned to one control group (Non-DA), an interactionist DA group (IA-DAG), and an interventionist DA group (IV-DAG). After the nine-session treatment, the study groups took a writing post-test. A one-way ANOVA test showed that the experimental groups outperformed the control group, although no significant differences were found between DA groups. Besides, no statistically significant differences were found between the groups' writing complexity. Considering accuracy, IA-DAG outperformed Non-DAG whereas no significant differences were observed between the experimental groups and between IV-DAG and Non-DAG. Fluency measures showed the superiority of DA groups to the control group. The first conclusion was that DA processes have a decisive role in improving writing skills and the CAF triad. Second, CAF components do not develop in a linear process, and employing DA procedures can be useful for its improvement. The paper has implications for language teachers and SLA researchers.