/LING
|
Update: February 24, 2023 The new version of Termout.org is now online, so this web site is now obsolete and will soon be dismantled. |
Lista de candidatos sometidos a examen:
1) interactions (*)
(*) Términos presentes en el nuestro glosario de lingüística
1) Candidate: interactions
Is in goldstandard
1
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines208 - : En este mismo sentido, Baker (1999), investigador del GRIC (Groupe de Recherche sur les Interactions Communicatives) de la Universidad Lumière Lyon 2, plantea que la argumentación vista desde una dimensión dialéctica, es un tipo de juego interactivo en que alguien emerge como ganador y otro, eventualmente, como perdedor . El análisis que el autor propone desde esta dimensión está basado en la dialéctica formal de Barth y Krabbe (1982). La dialéctica se inicia con una situación conflictiva:
2
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines282 - : This article analyzes and compares the use and distribution of repairs employed by a five- year-old child and two adults in two different communicative interactions: an interview and in a kindergarten event named 'circle' . The results indicate that, although adults are different individuals, both of them share some certain characteristics of repair moves usage. In contrast, child repair usages exhibit important differences according to each type text. Considering theoretical assumptions (Cole, 1999; Gülich & Kotschi, 1997; Jefferson, 1983; Silva, 2007), these variations can be attributed to the opportunities that each type of interaction poses for participants in order to monitor the text production process on line.
3
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines285 - : This article analyzes and compares the use and distribution of repairs employed by a five- year-old child and two adults in two different communicative interactions: an interview and in a kindergarten event named 'circle' . The results indicate that, although adults are different individuals, both of them share some certain characteristics of repair moves usage. In contrast, child repair usages exhibit important differences according to each type text. Considering theoretical assumptions (Cole, 1999; Gülich & Kotschi, 1997; Jefferson, 1983; Silva, 2007), these variations can be attributed to the opportunities that each type of interaction poses for participants in order to monitor the text production process on line.
4
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines295 - : "The study of the context of culture involves the observation of how a language is structured for use. To do so, we have to investigate authentic and complete interactions that will allow us to observe how people "use language to achieve culturally motivated goals" (Eggins, 1994: 25 ), which is done through the analysis of different genres. When analysing the context of culture, we should try to describe how the interaction's general purpose leads us to organize a text in stages, since it is not possible to convey all the meanings simultaneously. A genre, thus, is structured in stages, as Martin proposes (1992: 505), and consists of a social process oriented towards a goal –teleologically oriented, therefore– organized and realized by the register." (2005: 31-32)
5
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines454 - : With regard to cultural differences in online interactions, ^[108]Orgad (2006: 890 ) found that although online support groups seem to provide services that transcend national and cultural borders, “cultures and national contexts continue to play a central role in the shaping of the Internet and CMC”. The findings of our research appear to support Orgad’s results (2006). In response to our second research question, the results of the cross-cultural study imply that there is a clear tendency towards convergence in Spanish. The greater similarity at the structural level observed in online discussions in Spanish implies that the online writers of this corpus adapt to the general structure of the support groups. They accommodate to a greater extent to the general structure of the fora and converge more visibly in their use of structural elements than the writers using English. This tendency has been corroborated by other studies which investigated the use of greetings and closings.
6
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines454 - : In general, the results from the interactions in these communities of practice are in line with those reported in previous literature in the field: Women converge more than men and use more similar linguistic styles . The language practices of women in these groups tend inescapably towards homogenisation rather than diversification, a tendency which enhances the sociability of these exchanges and provides the necessary conventions of use to belong to a particular speech community. However, there are cross-cultural differences in accommodation. The participants using Spanish, both men and women, accommodate to the general style of the forum and converge more overtly in their use of structural elements than the participants using English. They seem to exhibit a greater feeling of belonging to the group, abiding more closely to the non-written rules of community behaviour.
Evaluando al candidato interactions:
3) online: 4
4) repair: 4
8) participants: 4
9) a: 4
10) adults: 4
11) differences: 4
13) converge: 3
14) dialéctica: 3 (*)
18) tendency: 3
interactions
Lengua: eng
Frec: 139
Docs: 85
Nombre propio: 1 / 139 = 0%
Coocurrencias con glosario: 1
Puntaje: 1.749 = (1 + (1+5.08746284125034) / (1+7.12928301694497)));
Candidato aceptado
Referencias bibliográficas encontradas sobre cada término
(Que existan referencias dedicadas a un término es también indicio de terminologicidad.)| interactions |
: Candlin, C. (2000). General editor's preface. En K. Hyland (Ed.), Disciplinary discourses: Social interactions in academic writing (pp. xvii). Harlow: Longman. : Communication Accommodation Theory is a paradigm which has attracted the interest of a wide range of disciplines and has been applied to different media such as writing, songs, and human computer interactions (^[34]Giles et al., 1991). : Flege, J. E. (2007). Language contact in bilingualism: Phonetic system interactions. In J. Cole & J. Hualde (Eds.), Laboratory Phonology 9 (pp. 353-380). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. : Grob, L. M., Meyers, R. A. & Schuh, R. (1997). Powerful/powerless language use in group interactions: Sex differences or similarities? Communication Quarterly, 45(3), 282-303. : Guendouzi, J. & Müller, N. (2002). Defining trouble-sources in dementia: Repair strategies and conversational satisfaction in interactions with an Alzheimer’s patient. Investigations in clinical phonetics and linguistics, 15-30. : Guiller, J. & Durndell, A. (2006). ‘I totally agree with you’: Gender interactions in educational online discussion groups. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 22(5), 368-381. : Gülich, E. & Kotschi, T. (1987). Les actes de reformulation dans la consultation La Dame de Caluire. En P. Bange (Ed.), L'analyse des interactions verbales. La Dame de Caluire: Une consultation (pp.15-81). Berne/ Frankfurt/ Nueva York/ París: Lang. : Haberlandt, K. & Graesser, A. (1985). Component processes in text comprehension and some of their interactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 114, 357-374. : Hegelheimer, V. & Tower, D. (2004). Using CALL in the classroom: Analyzing student interactions in an authentic classroom. System, 32(2), 185-205. : Hyland, K. (2000). Disciplinary discourses-social interactions in academic writing. Harlow, U.K.: Pearson Education Limited. : Hyland, K. (2004). Disciplinary Discourses: Social Interactions in Academic Writing. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. : Jiang, F. & Hyland, K. (2016). Nouns and academic interactions: A neglected feature of metadiscourse. Applied Linguistics, 37, 1-25. : Kerbrat- Orecchioni, C. (1995). Les interactions verbales. Tome I. Paris: Armand Colin. : Laforest, M. (2009). Complaining in front of a witness: Aspects of blaming others for their behavior in multi-party family interactions. Journal of Pragmatics, 41, 2452-2464. : Lee, J. J. & Deakin, L. (2016). Interactions in L1 and L2 Undergraduate Student Writing: Interactional Metadiscourse in Successful and Less-Successful Argumentative Essays. Journal of Second Language Writing, 33(C), 21-34. : Leys, C. & Schumann, S. (2010). A non-parametric method to analyze interactions: The adjusted rank transform test. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 684-688. : Marslen-Wilson, W. & Welsh, A. (1978). Processing interactions and lexical accessduring word recognition in continuos speech. Cognitive Psychology, 10, 29-63. : McNamara, D. S., Kintsch, E., Butler-Songer, N. & Kintsch, W. (1996). Are good texts always better? Interactions of text coherence, background knowledge, and levels of understanding in learning from text. Cognition and Instruction, 14(1), 1-43. : Mondada, L. & Pekarek, S. (2001). Interactions acquisitionnelles en contexte: Perspectives théoriques et enjeux didactiques. Le Français Dans le Monde, Numeró Spécial: Théories linguistiques et enseignement du français aux non-francophones (juillet), 107-142. : Montrul, S. & Foote, R. (2014). Age of acquisition interactions in bilingual lexical access: A study of the weaker language of L2 learners and heritage speakers. International Journal of Bilingualism, 18(3), 274-303. : Mori, J. & Hayashi, M. (2006). The achievement of intersubjectivity through embodied completions: A study of interactions between First and Second Language Speakers. Applied Linguistics, 27(2), 195-219. : O'Reilly, T., & McNamara, D. S. (2002a). Text coherence effects: Interactions of prior knowledge and reading skill. Ponencia presentada en the 43rd annual meeting of the Psychonomic Society Inc., Kansas City, MO. : Oteíza, T., Henríquez, R. & Pinuer, C. (2015). History class interactions and the transmission of recent Chilean memory of human rights violations. Journal of Educational Media, Memory and Society, 7(2) 44-67. : Pontecorvo, C. & Arcidiacono, F. (2014). Social interactions in families and schools as contexts for the development of spaces of thinking. En T. Zittoun & A. Iannaccone (Eds.), Activity of thinking in social spaces (pp. 83-97). Nueva York: Nova Science Publishers. : Schneuwly, B. (1994). Genres et types de discours: Considérations psychologiques et ontogénétiques. En Y. Reuter (Ed.), Les interactions lecture-écriture (pp. 155-173). Berne: Peter Lang. : Tomlin, R. (1995). Modeling individual tutorial interactions: Theoretical and empirical bases of ICALL. En V. Holland, J. Kaplan & M. Sams (Eds.), Intelligent language tutors: Theory shaping technology (pp. 221-241). Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum. : Vion, R. (1992). La communication verbale. Analyse des interactions. Paris: Hachette. |