This study arises out of the intention to examine the features of expert-lay interaction in a jury trial. The paper studies closing arguments constructed by legal experts as possible worlds which would be attractive for jurors. Theory of possible worlds is employed to present discourse practices as versions of the real world which may overlap, supplement or contradict one another. Legal experts construe and present possible worlds to jury members who deliver verdicts on the case, i.e. possess decisional power. Efficient involvement of jurors into the possible world constructed by the legal expert signals formation of discourse of concord. In order to make their own possible world more credible than the world of the procedural opponents, legal experts employ different interaction tools: description of legal concepts, empathy, appeals to social values, imperative and question utterances, personalization.
The learner’s own language (commonly referred to as ‘L1’ or ‘first language’) has been neglected as a resource in the learning of another language and, in some contexts, it has been banned altogether. The arguments in favour of own-language exclusion are not supported by research and the policy is not followed by a majority of teachers. A reconsideration of these arguments and an awareness of practical suggestions for drawing on the learners’ own language as a resource for learning may help language teachers to enrich their repertoire of teaching techniques and activities.
Attardo, Salvatore, Victor Raskin (1991). Script theory revis(it)ed: joke similarity and joke representation model. Humor , 4:3–4: 293–347.
Booth, Wayne C. (1983). The Rhetoric of Fiction. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press
Coulson, Seana (2001). Semantic Leaps: Frame-Shifting and Conceptual Blending in Meaning Construction . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Coulson, Seana, Esther Pascual (2006). For the sake of argument: Mourning the unborn and reviving the dead through conceptual blending. Annual Review of
Computerized dynamic assessment (CDA) posits itself as a new type of assessment that includes mediation in the assessment process. Proponents of dynamic assessment (DA) in general and CDA in particular argue that the goals of DA are in congruence with the concept of validity that underscores the social consequences of test use and the integration of learning and assessment (Sternberg & Grigorenko, 2002; Poehner, 2008; Shabani, 2012;). However, empirical research on CDA falls short in supporting such an argument. Empirical studies on CDA are riddled with ill-defined constructs and insufficient supporting evidence in regard to the aspects of validity postulated by Messick (1989, 1990, 1996). Due to the scarcity of research on CDA, this paper explores the potentials and the viability of this intervention-based assessment in computer assisted language testing context in light of its conformity with Messick’s unitary view of validity. The paper begins with a discussion of the theoretical foundations and models of DA. It then proceeds to discuss the differences between DA and non-dynamic assessment (NDA) measures before critically appraising the empirical studies on CDA. The critical review of the findings in CDA literature aims at shedding light on some drawbacks in the design of CDA research and the compatibility of the concept of construct validity in CDA with Messick’s (1989) unitary concept of validity. The review of CDA concludes with some recommendations for rectifying gaps to establish CDA in a more prominent position in computerized language testing.
. “‘Over-The-Hill” Gang Meet In Argument Park.’” Kalendár - Almanac. Ed. Joseph Stefka. Pittsburgh: National Slovak Society of the USA, 1988. 44-54. Print.
Koban, Vasil Stefan. “Heavenly Father.” Kalendár - Almanac. Ed. Joseph Stefka. Pittsburgh: National Slovak Society of the USA, 1991. 44-48. Print.
Koban, Vasil Stefan. Marienkine žiale. Bratislava: Vydavateľstvo Spolku slovenských spisovateľov, 2006. Print.
Magocsi, Paul Robert. Our People: Carpatho-Rusyns and Their Descendants in North America. 4th rev. ed. Ontario
. The Structure of Language. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 246-323.
Levinson, Stephen (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Partington, Allan (2003). The Linguistics of Political Argument: The Spin-Doctor and the Wolf- Pack at the White House. London, New York: Routledge.
Pullum, Geoffrey K., Rodney Huddleston (2002). Negation. Huddleston, Rodney, Geoffrey K. Pullum, eds. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 785
learning and teaching: Some valid assumptions and invalid arguments. In Mauranen, A. & Sajavaara, K. (Eds.), Applied linguistics across disciplines. AILA Review, 12, 42-55.
Ellis, E. M. (2012). Language awareness and its relevance to TESOL. University of Sydney Papers in TESOL, 7, 1-123.
Ghosn, I. K. (2002). Four good reasons to use literature in primary school ELT. ELT Journal, 56(2), 172-179.
Gilroy-Scott, N. (1983). Teaching Literature Overseas: Language-base Approaches. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Which textbooks are used in French classes? Can the struggle to choose a good textbook affect the communication procedure in French? What is the proportion of language, intercultural and communicative activities in selected textbooks? What are the reasons for purchasing language-based and communication-based textbooks? The present study explores these questions and presents results with broad implications for teachers of French at secondary schools. It points out some significant markers such as textbook type activities preferences and arguments for choosing textbooks for French classes.
interlanguage grammars: A prosodic approach. Second Language Research, 22, 243-268.
Goldberg, A. (1995). Constructions: A Construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Goldberg, A. E. (1999). The emergence of the semantics of argument structure constructions. The emergence of language, 197-212.
Green, G. M. (1974). Semantics and syntactic regularity, Indiana University Press.
Gropen, J., Pinker, S., Hollander, M., Goldberg, R. & Wilson, R. 1989. The learnability and
William S. New, Hristo Kyuchukov and Jill de Villiers
The Roma constitute an ideal case of educational injustice meeting linguistic difference, racism, social marginalization, and poverty. This paper asks whether human-rights or capabilities approaches are best suited to address issues related to the language education of Roma students in Europe. These children are disadvantaged by not growing up with the standard dialect of whatever language is preferred by the mainstream population, and by the low status of the Romani language, and non-standard dialect of the standard language they usually speak. We examine language education for Roma students in Croatia, the Czech Republic, and Bulgaria, describing similarities and differences across contexts. We explain weak and strong version of language rights arguments, and the ways these principles are expressed, and not expressed in education policies. Sen’s capabilities approach can be employed to generate contextualized visions of education reform that speak directly to disadvantages suffered by Roma children.