<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">The main objective of this corpus-based study is to research the most frequent two-word collocations in the corpus of nursing scientific articles and compare this newly assembled list of nursing collocations with the Academic Collocation List (ACL). The nursing scientific articles corpus (NSAC) used in this study comprises 1,119,441 words from 262 articles of 10 high-quality journals from the Medical Library Association list which nursing students can freely access. The focus is on noun-noun and noun-adjective collocations. The selected articles were converted into txt files using the ABBYY Fine Reader. WordSmith Tools 7.0 and TermeX were used for noun and collocation extraction. The newly assembled Nursing Collocation List (NCL) and the ACL were compared using Microsoft Excel 2016. A total of 488 collocations were identified in the NSAC and the NCL contains 234 (47.9%) noun + noun and 254 (52.1%) adjective + noun collocation combinations. The most frequent two-word collocation is <italic>health care</italic> and it appeared 618 times in the NSAC. The ACL (2,469) and the NCL (488) share 123 two-word collocations. Although there are some correspondences between collocations in the two corpora, key nursing collocations with notably higher frequencies are identified in the NSAC (365). Despite the fact that the ACL is the most extensive collocation list across different academic fields and it certainly plays an important role in teaching English as a foreign language, this study suggests that it does not provide key nursing collocations for improvement of nursing collocation competence.</abstract>

Collocations of high frequency words in nursing research articles and The Academic Collocation List: Similarities and differences

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">The paper examines the application of computer assisted language learning (CALL) in English language classes in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The research was designed as an empirical examination of the attitudes of teachers and students on the successful application of computer assisted language learning in English language classrooms in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Lack of motivation is one the problems that most teachers are faced with. There are many causes of poor motivation, but one of them is certainly the unattractiveness and dullness of traditional methods, teaching materials and resources. However, many authors with educational experience point out that the use of information technology can positively influence students’ motivation and encourage them to work actively. While adults, as digital immigrants, might not use modern information technology excessively, children and teens are true digital natives, who have grown up with the latest technologies and use them with great pleasure in all aspects of their lives adapting them to their needs (Prensky, 2001). The results obtained in this research are an indicator of the current attitude of teachers and students towards these issues, but they also highlight some important necessary reforms in the field of teacher education.</abstract>

Computer assisted language learning in English language classrooms in Bosnia and Herzegovina

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">This article introduces and discusses an empirical investigation that aimed to establish how pre-service teachers of English (hereinafter “participants”) framed their perceptions of Canvas, a learning management system (LMS), in their studies of English as a Foreign Language (EFL). In the present study, the participants and their respective controls (i.e., non-teacher EFL students) were requested to write a short reflective essay associated with the use of the LMS in their EFL course. All participants and the control group used Canvas as their LMS. The corpus of the participants’ and controls’ reflective essays was analysed qualitatively by means of framing analysis. The results of the qualitative framing analysis revealed that whilst there were similarities in the participants’ and controls’ framing, the corpus of the participants’ essays involved instances of framing that were specific to the participants’ perceptions of Canvas. These findings and their linguo-didactic implications were further presented in the article.</abstract>

English goes digital: Framing pre-service teachers’ perceptions of a learning management system in their EFL studies

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">Rhetorical questions (RQs), as a cross-breed of questions and statements, represent an effective tool in putting forward the Speaker’s ideas, as well as influencing the ideas and opinions of other people. Because of their communicative effectiveness and multifunctionality, they are frequently used in different contexts and for different purposes, and, as such, they represent an interesting topic for further research. The aim of this paper is threefold: (i) to explore the nature of the implied answer to RQs, (ii) to offer a classification of RQs based on the Speaker’s communication style, and (iii) to examine whether (or to what extent) the Speaker-Addressee relationship (peer-to-peer, superior-to-inferior, inferior-to-superior) influences the selection and frequency of use of different types of RQs. Using Stalnaker’s (2002) model of Common Ground and Caponigro and Sprouse’s (2007) concepts of Speaker’s and Addressee’s Beliefs, the author redefines the nature of the answers implied by RQs, claiming that they are imposed on the Addressee rather than mutually recognized as obvious. Based on the model of communication styles as defined by Yuan et al. (2018), RQs are classified into aggressive, friendly and sarcastic/ironical questions with imposed answers. The analysis of the corpus, which consisted of 275 RQs taken from ten American movie scripts, showed that friendly RQs are more common than the other two types, and that, in instances where one of the interlocutors is in a superior position, superior-to-inferior RQs are by far more common than vice versa. The finding that RQs asked by inferiors make up less than a third of RQs occurring between interlocutors with different social standing is in line with the view that answers to RQs are imposed on Addressees.</abstract>

Rhetorical questions as aggressive, friendly or sarcastic/ironical questions with imposed answers

AHEAD OF PRINT

Volume 11 (2023): Issue 2 (December 2023)

Volume 11 (2023): Issue 1 (October 2023)

Volume 10 (2022): Issue 2 (December 2022)

Volume 10 (2022): Issue 1 (October 2022)

Volume 9 (2021): Issue 2 (December 2021)

Volume 9 (2021): Issue 1 (October 2021)

Volume 8 (2020): Issue 2 (December 2020)

Volume 8 (2020): Issue 1 (December 2020)

Volume 7 (2019): Issue 2 (December 2019)

Volume 7 (2019): Issue 1 (October 2019)

Volume 6 (2018): Issue 2 (December 2018)

Volume 6 (2018): Issue 1 (October 2018)

Volume 5 (2017): Issue 2 (December 2017)

Volume 5 (2017): Issue 1 (October 2017)

Volume 4 (2016): Issue 2 (December 2016)

Volume 4 (2016): Issue 1 (October 2016)

Volume 3 (2015): Issue 2 (December 2015)

Volume 3 (2015): Issue 1 (October 2015)

Volume 2 (2014): Issue 2 (December 2014)

Volume 2 (2014): Issue 1 (October 2014)

ExELL

 ExELL (Explorations in English Language and Linguistics) is an international peer-reviewed electronic journal, published as a joint project of the School of English Studies of the University Josip Juraj Strossmayer Osijek, Croatia and English Language and Literature Department of Tuzla University from Tuzla, Bosnia and Herzegovina.  The aim of the journal is to promote and facilitate academic exchange in English theoretical and applied linguistics. Our mission is to provide a linguistics journal based on data drawn from the English language that would reflect a wide range of interests and opinions. We want to create opportunities for scholarly communication by encouraging the dissemination of theoretical and research-informed insights using the Internet as a medium in order to make linguistics accessible to the widest possible audience.  The journal offers a wide range of theoretical, methodological, and educational approaches to English. We encourage submission of various topics about the English language and　 linguistics, such as: theoretical and descriptive approaches to English, synchronic and diachronic variability of English, cognitive approaches to English, discourse analysis, corpus linguistics, contrastive linguistics, applied linguistics, ELT/TEFL/ESP, second language acquisition, translation studies, the structure of contemporary varieties of English (phonology, morphology, syntax and semantics) and other topics related to exploration of English language and linguistics.  The journal is interested in papers which focus on defining new problems for the study of the English language and linguistics, providing new insights into the known problems and developing new methodologies to approach old and new problems.  The journal does not have article processing charges (APCs) nor article submission charges.  Archiving  Sciendo archives the contents of this journal in Portico - digital long-term preservation service of scholarly books, journals and collections.  Plagiarism Policy  The editorial board is participating in a growing community of Similarity Check System's users in order to ensure that the content published is original and trustworthy. Similarity Check is a medium that allows for comprehensive manuscripts screening, aimed to eliminate plagiarism and provide a high standard and quality peer-review process. 