مطالب

This synthesis reviews the methodological issues in empirical studies investigating the effect of working memory capacity (WMC) on relative clause ambiguity resolution where results have failed to be consistent cross-linguistically and even intra-linguistically. This discrepancy might have occurred due to ‘methodological inconsistencies’ in the design (Liu & Brown, 2015), administration, and scoring of WMC measures. This study aimed to investigate the aggregative and developmental status of the methodological practices of WMC measures and describe how transparently such practices have been reported. Based on a comprehensive search, 39 experiments were retrieved from 25 studies, culminating in a collection of studies with a time span of 22 years from 1999 to 2021, and coded for 46 features. Results revealed that although over the past 22 years, the field has witnessed significant improvements in the employment of WMC tests, there are still a lot of variations and inconsistencies calling for attempts to raise methodological awareness among researchers to afford more attention to quality and transparency in reporting WMC tests. The article concludes with a call for reform in standardizing WMC tests and a number of other recommendations for future primary and secondary research.

This study intended to explore the effect of Augmented Reality (AR) on lowering foreign language anxiety (FLA) in adult Iranian EFL learners. To this end, a triangulation study including a quasi-experimental pre-test post-test design in the first phase, and an oral interview in the second phase was designed and implemented. Forty adult Iranian EFL learners took part in the quantitative study and were randomly assigned to experimental and control groups. The authors developed and delivered the AR-infused materials through the Zappar application, an AR platform. The treatment involved the conventional language teaching method for the control and the AR-integrated one for the experimental group for 20 sessions. The anxiety level of learners in both groups was assessed before and after the treatment to check for any effects. Data on participants’ FLA has been gathered through Horwitz’s (1986) Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Survey (FLCAS) questionnaire and analyzed via ANCOVA in SPSS. Also, the participants in the experimental group were interviewed at the end of the experiment to provide feedback on their AR-integrated language learning experience. Results revealed that AR did not affect learners’ foreign language anxiety levels. Also, some learners found it not very relaxing and easy to use. This could be attributed to the novelty of the experience and the cognitive load imposed on learners. The study’s outcomes were in contrast to several previous research findings; however, since research in this area is still in its infancy, more research should be done on the impact of AR on language education.

Metadiscourse markers are aspects of a text’s organization denoting a writer’s stance toward its propositional content. Given the ideological difference between quantitative and qualitative research in terms of determinacy, metadiscourse markers can be viewed as a venue through which writers’ epistemological positions are presented. The present study was designed to compare the use frequency of interactive and interactional metadiscourse markers in the discussion section of 20 quantitative and 20 qualitative applied linguistics research articles, with reference to Hyland's (2005) framework. The analysis involved the comparison of frequency counts of metadiscourse markers across the two corpora using a series of Chi-square tests. To that end, the results were computed and analyzed through SPSS. The results revealed significant differences in terms of the frequency of all interactive and interactional metadiscourse markers except for frame markers, evidentials, attitude markers, engagement markers, and boosters. The findings of study have important implications for academic writing instruction.

Translation quality assessment with its focus on the formulation of a comprehensive model for translation evaluation has gained a growing interest in the field of translation studies. However, little attention has been paid to the use of linguistic theories in the evaluative judgment of a translation. The aim of this study was to apply a particular kind of linguistic analysis based on systemic functional linguistics (SFL) as a framework for the translation quality assessment of a novel. Meanwhile, it aimed to identify the kinds of overt errors and the used translation strategies in English to Persian. To this end, thirty pages of The Sound and The Fury by Faulkner (1329) and its translation by Bahman Sholevar (2003) were selected and the mismatches across the three metafunctions of ideational, interpersonal, and thematic meanings were identified based on SFL. The comparison of the source text (ST) and the target text (TT) revealed that the ideational meaning had the greatest number of errors as produced by the translator. Moreover, omission constituted the largest kind of overt translation error. Thus, the translator mostly used reduction strategies and text expansion strategies in translating the ST. The results showed that SFL can successfully be applied to evaluate the correct translation of the three metafunctions of language. This study has important implications for syllabus designers of translation studies, translation teachers, and literary translators.    

This paper reports on an investigation of native language-based differential item functioning (DIF) across the subtests of Iranian Undergraduate University Entrance Special English Exam (IUUESEE). Fourteen thousand one hundred seventy two foreign-language test takers (including four groups of Azeri, Persian, Kurdish, and Luri test takers) were chosen for the study. Uniform DIF (UDIF) and Non-uniform DIF (NUDIF) analyses were conducted on data from the four versions of IUUESEE. After establishing the unidimensionality and local independence of the data, DIF findings showed that Luri test takers were more advantaged than other native language groups across the subtests. NUDIF analysis uncovered that almost all subtests functioned in favor of low-ability test takers who haven’t been expected to outperform high-ability test takers. A probable explanation for native language-ability DIF was that Luri and low-ablity test takers were more likely to venture lucky guesses. Thoughtless errors and guessing, test-wiseness, overconfidence, stem length, unappealing distractors, and time were proposed as possible causes of DIF in IUUESEE. It was also found that the reading subtest included the large number of items with significant DIF.