مطالب

The advent of ChatGPT, an all-purpose intelligent Chabot created by Open AI, has created a multitude of prospects and opportunities within the realm of language education. Owing to its exceptional capacity to produce a wide range of textual outputs, ChatGPT responds to queries in a matter of seconds. The present study aimed to examine the appropriateness of ChatGPT-based instruction and flipped language learning instruction (FLLI) in classrooms in terms of enhancing EFL learners’ interactional metadiscourse realization across language proficiency levels. Sixty-three English language learners were divided into four distinct groups: 16 in the advanced and 16 in the intermediate FLLI group, 15 in the advanced, and 16 in the intermediate ChatGPT group. Before initiating the study, all participants were given a pretest that specifically assessed the use of interactional metadiscourse markers (IMMs) in argumentative writing. The four experimental groups were separately exposed to ChatGPT-based instruction and FLLI during eight sessions. Results from a two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) procedure through SPSS (version 25) revealed that the ChatGPT-based instruction was more effective than FLLI, and both intermediate and advanced language learners following the ChatGPT-based instruction used IMMs in argumentative writing more successfully. Moreover, the participants’ perceptions of ChatGPT and FLLI were analyzed through MAXQDA (version 2020), showing more positive attitudes towards using ChatGPT in language learning in general and IM realization in particular. The findings have the potential to provide advantages for teacher educators in terms of utilizing ChatGPT learning approaches.

Lexical bundles are recurrent multi-word sequences that play a crucial role in academic discourse. This article presents an analysis of lexical bundles in book reviews across the disciplines of human and natural sciences. Drawing from a corpus of 737 book reviews, the study investigates the functional roles and structural patterns of these recurrent linguistic units. The research aims to bridge a gap in the literature by exploring how lexical bundles vary across disciplines. Employing a quantitative-qualitative approach, the study first quantitatively identifies the most common 4-word lexical bundles and compares their distribution between the two disciplines. The researchers then qualitatively analyzed the context in which these bundles are used, observing that they often serve to refer to or evaluate the structure, content, audience, or scope of the book under review. Findings reveal that while both human and natural sciences book reviews share some lexical bundles, they exhibit variations in their distribution, structures, and functions. Notably, natural sciences book reviews employ a greater frequency of lexical bundles signaling an evaluative context, particularly contexts related to the assessment of a book. The study also uncovers differences in the structural preferences of lexical bundles between the two disciplines. This research contributes to a deeper understanding of the genre-specific utilization of lexical bundles and underscores their role in conveying evaluative meaning in scholarly discourse. Furthermore, the study suggests avenues for further exploration, providing a foundation for future investigations into the intricate interplay between linguistic features and disciplinary preferences.