scholarly journals Pragmatics

2006 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 60-62
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Foreign Language ◽  
Online Discussion ◽  
American English ◽  
Asynchronous Online Discussion ◽  
Defense Language Institute ◽  
Interdisciplinary Journal ◽  
Grammar And Interaction ◽  
Sociology Journals

06–187Hayashi, Makoto, Referential problems and turn construction: An exploration of an intersection between grammar and interaction. Text – Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse (Mouton de Gruyter) 25.4 (2005), 437–468.06–188Holmes, Janet (U Wellington, New Zealand; [email protected]), Leadership talk: How do leaders ‘do mentoring’, and is gender relevant?Journal of Pragmatics (Elsevier) 37.11 (2005), 1779–1800.06–189Kwon, Jihyun (Defense Language Institute, Foreign Language Center, USA), Expressing refusals in Korean and in American English. Multilingua (Mouton de Gruyter) 23.4 (2004), 339–364.06–190Lewin, Beverly A., Contentiousness in science: The discourse of critique in two sociology journals. Text – Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse (Mouton de Gruyter) 25.6 (2005), 723–744.06–191Lewis, Diana M. (Faculté des Langues, Lyon, France; [email protected]), Arguing in English and French asynchronous online discussion. Journal of Pragmatics (Elsevier) 37.11 (2005), 1801–1818.06–192Overstreet, Maryann (U Hawaii at Manoa, USA; [email protected]), And stuffund so: Investigating pragmatic expressions in English and German. Journal of Pragmatics (Elsevier) 37.11 (2005), 1845–1864.06–193Wang, Yu-Fang, From lexical to pragmatic meaning: Contrastive markers in spoken Chinese discourse. Text – Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse (Mouton de Gruyter) 25.4 (2005), 469–518.

scholarly journals Pragmatics

2006 ◽  
Vol 39 (2) ◽  
pp. 152-153
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
San Diego ◽  
Online Discussion ◽  
Esl Students ◽  
Northern Arizona ◽  
Discourse Processes ◽  
Asynchronous Online Discussion ◽  
Mandarin Conversation

06–411Holmes, Janet (U Wellington, New Zealand; [email protected]), Leadership talk: How do leaders ‘do mentoring’, and is gender relevant?Journal of Pragmatics (Elsevier) 37.11 (2005), 1779–1800.06–412Jiang, Xiangying (Northern Arizona U, USA; [email protected]), Suggestions: What should ESL students know?System (Elsevier) 34.1 (2006), 36–54.06–413Lewis, Diana M. (Faculté des Langues, Lyon, France; [email protected]), Arguing in English and French asynchronous online discussion. Journal of Pragmatics (Elsevier) 37.11 (2005), 1801–1818.06–414Overstreet, Maryann (U Hawai‘i at Manoa, USA; [email protected]), And stuff, und so: Investigating pragmatic expressions in English and German. Journal of Pragmatics (Elsevier) 37.11 (2005), 1845–1864.06–415Ruey-Jiuan, Regina Wu (San Diego State U, USA), Initiating repair and beyond: The use of two repeat-formatted repair initiations in Mandarin conversation. Discourse Processes (Lawrence Erlbaum) 41.1 (2006), 67–109.

scholarly journals A REVIEW OF RECENT PAPERS ON ONLINE DISCUSSION IN TEACHING AND LEARNING IN HIGHER EDUCATION

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Hammond
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Curriculum Design ◽  
Teaching And Learning ◽  
Online Discussion ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Online Forums ◽  
Computer Communication ◽  
Asynchronous Online Discussion ◽  
Design Software ◽  
Additional Value

This paper presents a review of a sample of recent case studies on the use of asynchronous online discussion in higher education. These studies are analyzed in terms of curriculum design, assumptions about teaching and learning, and claims and reported conditions for using online discussion. The claims made for asynchronous online discussion—in particular the opportunities for interaction between learners, and permanent access to these interactions—are found to be frequently based on social constructivist principles. Asynchronous online discussion is seen as offering additional value by providing learners with experience of computer communication tools and opportunities for taking part in group work. Several constraints on participation within online forums are described. These are discussed in relation to the nature of curriculum design, software design, tutor support, and learners’ attitudes and previous experience. The conditions under which asynchronous online discussion may best support learning are set out, and avenues for future research are suggested.

scholarly journals FACE-TO-FACE OR ONLINE SPEAKING PRACTICE: A COMPARISON OF STUDENTS’ FOREIGN LANGUAGE CLASSROOM ANXIETY LEVEL

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-67
Author(s):  
Rahmati Putri Yaniafari ◽  
Ajeng Ayu Rihardini
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Language ◽  
Oral Presentation ◽  
Online Discussion ◽  
Tertiary Education ◽  
Anxiety Level ◽  
Survey Study ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
Language Classroom ◽  
Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety ◽  
Threatening Situation

Speaking using foreign language in front of other people can be one of the most anxiety-provoking situations (Minghe & Yuan, 2013). Learners who does not enjoy interacting with other people or being the center of attention may exhibit extreme anxiety when they are asked to take parts in oral presentation, discussion, or any other kind of language activities. A study found that online discussion may decrease the effect. It provides a non-threatening situation for learners who are shy and withdrawn (Bakar et al., 2013). This survey study aims to see whether it is also applied in Indonesian tertiary education by investigating and comparing the learners’ level of anxiety in face to face speaking class before Covid-19 pandemic and online speaking class during the pandemic. 120 students who experienced both speaking courses before and during the pandemic participated in the survey. Consistent with the result of other studies (Bakar et al.,2013; Rodrigues & Vethamani, 2015), this study found that in average, learners feel less anxious during during online speaking class (48,41%) compare to face-to-face class (60,96%).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document