Termout.org logo/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) languages (*)
(*) Términos presentes en el nuestro glosario de lingüística

1) Candidate: languages


Is in goldstandard

1
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines216 - : Slobin, D. & Hoiting, N. (1994). Reference to movement in spoken and signed languages: Typological considerations . Ponencia presentada en Twentieth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, Universidad de California Berkeley, Berkeley, Estados Unidos de Norteamérica. [ [106]Links ]

2
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines242 - : Languages for Specific Purposes: Changing perspectives and new challenges

3
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines250 - : Legal discourse across languages and cultures: Globalising trends and local identities

4
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines254 - : Isabel A. Knoerrich escribe el sexto artículo titulado Languages identities and cultures between Spain and Morocco: Questions in modern hispanoarabistics . En él, busca actualizar los estudios acerca de la situación de la lengua española en el norte de Marruecos. El estudio de carácter más bien exploratorio se realizó en la ciudad de Ceuta donde se produce contacto intenso y continuo entre la cultura española y marroquí. En este artículo la autora se plantea una amplia gama de interesantes preguntas en torno a la descripción de la orientación cultural de estos grupos en su comportamiento lingüístico. Aunque no se explicita completamente la manera en que se abordan estas problemáticas, se enfatiza la importancia de observar el discurso en aspectos de la vida cotidiana en la ciudad como lo son las transacciones comerciales. A través de un breve análisis cualitativo la autora intenta dar cuenta en forma preliminar de los valores culturales de cada nación reflejados el discurso e interacción de

5
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines311 - : Within vertical discourse Bernstein makes a second distinction between hierarchical and horizontal knowledge structures. A hierarchical knowledge structure, exemplified by natural science disciplines, is "a coherent, explicit and systematically principled structure, hierarchically organised" which "attempts to create very general propositions and theories, which integrate knowledge at lower levels, and in this way shows underlying uniformities across an expanding range of apparently different phenomena" (Bernstein, 1999: 161-162). In contrast, a horizontal knowledge structure, exemplified by disciplines in the humanities and social sciences, is "a series of specialised languages with specialised modes of interrogation and criteria for the construction and circulation of texts" (Bernstein, 1999: 162 ).

6
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines313 - : Forms of address are specific ways of building a relationship between sender and receiver. In Romanian, addressing is achieved by means of specialized lexical units that call the attention of the receiver (appellatives) and that may be associated with corresponding grammatical elements (vocative, second person, interrogative, or imperative utterances) or with interjections whose role is to intensify the verbal mobilization (GALR, 2005). What is more, Romanian distinguishes between deferential and non-deferential pronouns (dumneavoastra - tu), just as happens in French (vous - tu), Spanish (usted - tú), German (Sie - du). In other respects, Romanian resembles Portuguese and Italian since these languages have developed a third unit for what we call 'mitigated politeness', creating thus a contrast between 'emphatic deference' (distant respect) and 'non-emphatic deference' (familiar respect) (Niculescu, 1965: 43): dumneavoastra / dumneata .

7
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines488 - : between the source and host languages:

8
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines488 - : In spite of the resistant attitude towards foreignisms of this kind by some speakers and academics, it is altogether logical for people to try to communicate more concisely (^[135]Gerding et al., 2012), given that natural languages are influenced by the economy principle of “[being] quick and easy” (^[136]Leech, 1983: 67 ). Economy of expression as a principle of linguistic change has an undeniable impact on syntax (^[137]Moessner, 1997), and, more importantly for our study, on minimal parts of speech such as morphemes and lexical units. The economy principle is best evidenced in Spanish by processes of word formation such as abbreviation and clipping (e.g., la foto > la fotografía, moto > motocicleta, la uni > la Universidad, el finde > el fin de semana) and the formation of hypocorisms or nicknames (e.g., Manu > Manuel, Tere > Teresa).

9
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines523 - : Lafford, B. A. (2012). Languages for specific purposes in the United States in a global context: Commentary on Grosse and Voght (1991 ) revisited. Modern Language Journal, 96(1), 1-27. [ [49]Links ]

10
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines524 - : More recently, heritage learners of all languages have been defined as “heritage speakers are bilingual native speakers of their heritage language, except that the degree of ultimate attainment in the heritage language is variable” (^[30]Montrul, 2016: 249 ). Montrul, like Valdés, focuses on the language abilities of the students as a principal component of the definition. However, ^[31]Fishman (2001) expands this definition beyond the scope of linguistic proficiency to include passive language skills as well as personal and familial connections to the culture. For Fishman, heritage languages present two main characteristics in the United States context: (1) they are those other than English, and (2) they are languages that “have a particular family relevance to the learners” (^[32]Fishman, 2001: 81). Given the increasing numbers of SHLs in the university setting, research has been forthcoming regarding how to best help these learners improve their language skills as well as how to better

11
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines524 - : SSP classes can assist students in preparing them to be more observant of the language used in the local community. These courses can incorporate sociolinguistic elements into the curriculum “to help students develop an understanding of how language and linguistic variation work, not just at the formal (i.e., linguistic) level but also with regard to social, political and aesthetic concerns” (^[94]Leeman, 2018: 351). Leeman continues recommending the use of sociolinguistics as a way to empower students and force them to begin to question “common assumptions” about languages and language varieties and “equip students to challenge the status quo” (Leeman, 2018: 353 ). ^[95]Martínez (2003) frames the goal of critical language awareness as one that empowers students to make informed linguistic choices. He provides this effective example:

12
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines526 - : Fishman, J. A. (2006). Acquisition, maintenance, and recovery of heritage languages: An “American Tragedy” or “New Opportunity” . In G. Valdés, J. Fishman, R. Chávez & W. Pérez (Eds.), Developing Minority Language Resources: The Case of Spanish in California (pp. 12-22). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters . [ [211]Links ]

13
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines527 - : ^3Diglossia is defined broadly as “the reservation of highly valued segments of a community’s linguistic repertoire (which are not the first to be learned, but are learned later and more consciously, usually through formal education), for situations perceived as more formal and guarded; and the reservation of less highly valued segments (which are learned first with little or no conscious effort), of any degree of linguistic relatedness to the higher valued segments, from stylistic differences to separate languages, for situations perceived as more informal and intimate” (Fasold, 1984: 53 ).

14
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines528 - : Linguistic landscape (LL) is an area of study defined as the “visibility and salience of languages on public and commercial signs in a given territory or region” (^[107]Landry & Bourhis, 1997: 23 ). There are studies in sociolinguistics, sociology, social psychology, geography, and media studies related to LL. The languages used in public signs indicate what languages are or may become locally relevant (^[108]Kasanga, 2012). LL has become a useful tool to understand the evolution of urban space, and therefore the transformation of globalized societies of the 21^st century. Signage in public spaces describe the identity of cities. Some authors study the LL as it relates to power, and therefore as a way to construct collective identity. As societal identities evolve, the LL evolves too. As ^[109]Gorter (2013: 191) states:

15
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines529 - : Valdés, G. (2014). Heritage language students: Profiles and possibilities. In T. G Wiley, J. K. Peyton, D. Christian, S. C. K. Moore & N. Liu (Eds.), Handbook of Heritage, Community, and Native American Languages in the United States: Research, Policy, and Educational Practice (pp . 27-35). New York, NY: Routledge. [ [80]Links ]

16
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines531 - : According to ^[56]Byram and Hu (2013), LSP is defined as “the teaching of second and foreign languages with the aim of helping learners enter or make progress in a particular area of work or field of study” (^[57]Byram & Hu, 2013: 391 ). The interdisciplinary field of LSP, which has steadily gained popularity in higher education in the US over the past two decades, has proved to be effective in providing student-centered elements and attracting students. Moreover, based on the 2007 report of the Ad Hoc Committee on Foreign Languages of the American Modern Language Association, the goals of foreign language education at the college level are redefined in accordance with the increasingly interconnected world which our students are being prepared to enter. That is,

17
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines531 - : “the language major should be structured to produce a specific outcome: educated speakers who have deep translingual and transcultural competence” (Ad Hoc Committee on Foreign Languages of the American Modern Language Association, 2007: 237 ).

18
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines575 - : Marrero, V. & Aguirre, C. (2003). Plural acquisition and development in Spanish. En S. Montrul & F. Ordóñez (Eds.), Linguistic theory and language development in hispanic languages: Papers from the 5th linguistics symposium and the 4th conference on the acquisition of Spanish and Portuguese (pp . 275-296). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press. [ [142]Links ]

19
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines577 - : Luzón, M. J. (2017). Connecting genres and languages in online scholarly communication: An analysis of research group blogs . Written Communication, 34(4), 1-31. [218]https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088317726298 [ [219]Links ]

20
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines591 - : García Negroni, M. M. & Libenson, M. (2019). A propósito de las causas dialógicas de la enunciación. El caso de las enunciaciones mirativas con el marcador Mir. Ponencia presentada en el 6th International Conference Discourse Markers in Romance Languages: Crosslinguistic approaches in Romance and beyond . Universidad de Bérgamo, Bérgamo, Italia. [ [136]Links ]

21
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines592 - : Research across languages shows that children follow the same progression of development of PA: sensitivity to syllables develops first followed by onsets and rimes and finally, phonemes (e .g., ^[81]Villalón, 2008; ^[82]Anthony, Williams, Durán & Laing, 2011; ^[83]Gutiérrez, et al., 2020). In Spanish, along with phoneme awareness, syllable awareness plays a significant role in reading (^[84]Herrera & Defior, 2005; ^[85]Anthony et al., 2011; ^[86]Calet, Flores, Jiménez-Fernández & Defior, 2016). However, by kindergarten, the majority of Spanish-speaking children seem to have mastered syllable awareness (^[87]Defior & Herrera, 2003; ^[88]Herrera et al., 2007; ^[89]De la Calle, Aguilar & Navarro, 2016). By contrast, phonemic awareness is the strongest early predictor of reading (^[90]Defior & Serrano, 2011; ^[91]Suárez-Coalla et al., 2013; ^[92]Gutiérrez & Díez, 2015; ^[93]Gutiérrez, 2016; ^[94]Jasińska & Laura-Ann, 2017) and continues being the strongest predictor of Spanish reading and

Evaluando al candidato languages:


1) linguistic: 9 (*)
3) heritage: 8 (*)
5) awareness: 5 (*)
6) fishman: 5
11) defior: 4
14) learners: 4 (*)
17) speakers: 4 (*)
18) montrul: 3
20) principle: 3

languages
Lengua: eng
Frec: 405
Docs: 146
Nombre propio: 7 / 405 = 1%
Coocurrencias con glosario: 5
Frec. en corpus ref. en eng: 401
Puntaje: 5.675 = (5 + (1+5.52356195605701) / (1+8.66533591718518)));
Rechazado: muy común;

Referencias bibliográficas encontradas sobre cada término

(Que existan referencias dedicadas a un término es también indicio de terminologicidad.)
languages
: (i) The 'conceptual level' is language-independent and is therefore shared by all the languages currently supported in the knowledge base. This level is made up of three sub-modules, all of which employ the same formal language (i.e. COREL; ^[57]Periñán & Mairal, 2010) to codify knowledge:
: Acedo-Matellán, V. (2016). The morphosyntax of transitions. A case study in Latin and other languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
: American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (2018). Publications. World-Readiness standards for learning languages [on line]. Retrieved from: [111]https://www.actfl.org/publications/all/world-readiness-standards-learning-languages/standards-summary
: Amritavalli, R. (1997). Chunking, lexical phrases and collocations: The grammar of words. En V. Prakasam & K. Tirumalesh (Eds.), Issues in English grammar (pp. 100-112). Hyderabad: Central Institute of English and Foreign Languages.
: Aparici, M., Perera, J., Rosado, E. & Tolchinsky, L. (2000). (Eds.). Developingliteracy across genres,modalities, and languages. Barcelona: Institute of Educational Sciences, University of Barcelona.
: Bazerman, C. (1999a). Languages of Edison's light . Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
: Benmamoun, E., Montrul, S. & Polinsky, M. (2013). Heritage languages and their speakers: Opportunities and challenges for linguistics. Theoretical Linguistics, 39(3-4), 129-181.
: Berman, R., Ragnarsdóttir, H. & Strömqvist, S. (2002). Discourse stance. Written Languages and Literacy, 5, 255-290.
: Biber, D. (2006). University Languages. A corpus-based study of spoken and written register. Ámsterdam: John Benjamins.
: Brantmeier, C. & Dragiyski, B. (2009). Toward a dependable measure of metacognitive reading strategies with advanced L2 learners. In C. Brantmeier (Ed.), Crossing languages and research methods: Analyses of adult foreign language reading (pp. 47-72). Charlotte, NC: IAP.
: Branum-Martin, L., Tao, S. & Garnaat, S. (2015). Bilingual phonological awareness: Reexamining the evidence for relations within and across languages. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107(1), 111-125.
: Buckwalter, A. S. & Ruiz, R. (2000). Mocoví. South American Indian Languages, Computer Database (Intercontinental Dictionary Series, vol. 1). General Editor Mary Ritchie Key. Irvine: University of California, CD-ROM.
: Burke, P. (2004). Languages and communities in early modern Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
: Busse, V. (2017). Plurilingualism in Europe: Exploring attitudes towards English and other European languages among adolescents in Bulgaria, Germany, the Netherlands, and Spain. Modern Language Journal, 101(3), 566-582.
: C-ORAL-ROM = Cresti, E. & Moneglia, M. (Eds.) (2005). C-ORAL-ROM: Integrated reference corpora for spoken Romance languages. Multimedia edition; tools of analysis; standard linguistic measures for validation in HTL. CD-ROM. Ámsterdam/Filadelfia: Jhon Benjamins.
: Cabau-Lampa, B. (2007). Mother tongue plus two European languages in Sweden: Unrealisitc educational goal? Language Policy, 6, 333-358.
: Caravolas, M. (2006). Learning to spell in different languages: How orthographic variables might affect early literacy. En R. M. Joshi & P. G. Aaron (Eds.), Handbook of orthography and literacy (pp. 497-511). Londres: LEA.
: Carreira, M. (2014a). Professional opportunities for heritage language speakers. In T. G. Wiley, J. K. Peyton, D. Christian, S. C. K. Moore & N. Liu (Eds.), Handbook of Heritage, Community, and Native American Languages in the United States (pp. 66-75). New York, NY: Routledge .
: Castellotti, V. & Moore, D. (2002). Social representations of languages and teaching: Guide for the development of language education policies in Europe from linguistic diversity to pluri-lingual education. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
: Celce-Murcia, M. (2002). On the use of selected grammatical features in academic writing. En M. Schleppegrell & M. Colombi (Eds.), Developing advanced literacy in first and second languages: Meaning with power (pp. 38-54). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
: Chen, W. (2008). Dimensions of subjectivity in natural languages. Ponencia presentada en el 46th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics on Human Language Technologies, 13-16.
: Chierchia, G. (1982). Nominalization and Montague grammar: A semantics without types for natural languages. Linguistics and Philosophy, 5, 303-54.
: Chierchia, G. (1998). Reference to Kinds across Languages. Natural Language Semantics, 6, 339-405.
: Chilton, P. & Lakoff, G. (1995). Foreign policy by metaphor. En Ch. Schaffner & A. Wenden (Eds.), Languages and peace (pp. 37-59). Brookfield, VT: Dartmouth Publishing Company.
: Codesido, A., Coloma, C., Garayzabal, E., Marrero, V., Mendoza, E. & Pavez, M. (2012). Spanish adquisition and development of PERLS. En M. Ball, D. Crystal & P. Fletcher (Eds.), Assessing grammar. The languages of LARSP (pp. 245-281). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
: Coffey, S. (2018). Choosing to study modern foreign languages: Discourses of value as forms of cultural capital. Applied Linguistics, 39(4), 462-480.
: Coleman, J. A., Galaczi, A. & Astruc, L. (2007). Motivation of UK school pupils towards foreign languages: A large-scale survey at Key State 3. Language Learning Journal, 35(2), 245-281.
: Consejo de Europa (2002). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Strasbourg: Cambridge University Press.
: Council of Europe. (2016). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages [on line]. Retrieved from: [113]https://www.coe.int/en/web/common-european-framework-reference-languages/home
: Cuetos, F., Mitchell, D. & Corley, M. (1996). Parsing in different languages. En M. Carreiras, J. García- Albea & N. Sebastián (Eds.), Language processing in Spanish (pp. 145-187). Hillsdale, NJ: Earlbaum.
: Cárdenas, J. P., Losada, J. C., Moreira, A., Torre, I. G. & Benito, R. M. (2011). Topological complexity in natural and formal languages. Int. J. Complex Systems in Science, 1(2), 221-225.
: Dehgani, Q., Izadpanah, S. & Shahnavaz, A. (2017). The effect of oral corrective feedback on beginner and low intermediate students’ speaking achievement. Jordan Journal of Modern Languages and Literature, 9(3), 279-294.
: Derby, L., LeLoup, J., Rasmussen, J. & de Souza, S. (2017). Developing intercultural competence and leadership through LSP curricula. In M. Long (Ed.), Languages for Specific Purposes: Trends in Curriculum Development (pp. 73-86). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press .
: Douglas, D. (2000). Assessing languages for specific purposes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
: Dörnyei, Z. & Al-Hoorie, A. (2017). The motivational foundation of learning languages other than Global English: Theoretical issues and research directions. Modern Language Journal, 101(3), 455-468.
: Enfield, N. J., Stivers, T. & Levinson, S. C. (2010). Question-response sequences in conversation across ten languages: An introduction. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(10), 2615-2619.
: Filipovic, R. (1996). English as a word donor to other languages of Europe. In R. Hartmann (Ed.), The English Language in Europe (pp. 37-48). Exeter: Intellect.
: Filipović, L. (2011). Speaking and remembering in one or two languages: Bilingual vs. monolingual lexicalization and memory for motion events. International Journal of Bilingualism, 15(4), 466-485.
: Fishman, J. (2001). 300-plus years of heritage language education in the United States. In J. Peyton, D. Ranard & S. McGinnis (Eds.), Heritage languages in America: Preserving a national resource (pp. 81-97). McHenry, IL: Center for Applied Linguistics and Delta Publishing.
: Fishman, J. A. (2001). Can Threatened Languages Be Saved? Reversing Language Shift, Revisited. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
: Fjeld, R. (2001). Interpretation of indefinite adjectives in legislative language. En F. Mayer (Ed.), Languages for special purposes: Perspectives for the new millennium (pp. 643-650). Tübingen: Narr.
: Fortanet, I., Palmer, J. & Postiguillo, S. (2001). Hedging devices in technical and academic English. En J. Palmer, S. Posteguillo & I. Fortanet (Eds.), Discourse analysis and terminology in languages for specific purposes (pp. 241-257). Castelló de la Plana: Universitat Jaume I.
: Fryer, T. B. (2012). Languages for specific purposes business curriculum creation and implementation in the United States. Modern Language Journal, 96, 122-139.
: Fábregas, A. & Marín, R. (2012). The role of Aktionsart in deverbal nouns: State nominalizations across languages. Journal of Linguistics, 8, 35-70.
: García, O. (2005). Positioning heritage languages in the United States. Modern Language Journal, 89, 601-605.
: Gast, V. & van der Auwera, J. (2011). Scalar additive operators in the languages of Europe. Language, 87(1), 2-54.
: Genre analysis has become one of the major influences on the current practices in the teaching and learning of languages, in general, and in the teaching and learning of ESP, in particular (Bhatia, 2005).
: Georgiou, G., Torppa, M., Manolitsis, G., Lyytinen, H. & Parrilla, R. (2012). Longitudinal predictors of reading and spelling across languages varying in orthographic consistency. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 25, 321-346.
: Gerndt, J. L. M. (2012). Shifting the curriculum to language for specific purposes. Global Business Languages, 17(2), 3-15.
: Gnutzmann, C. & Oldenburg, H. (1991). Contrastive text linguistics in LSP-Research: Theoretical considerations and some preliminary findings. En H. Schröder (Ed.), Subject-oriented texts: Languages for special purposes & text theory (pp. 103-136). Berlin: W. de Gruyter.
: Gotti, M. (2014). Reformulation and recontextualisation in popularisation discourse. Ibérica, Journal of the European Association of Languages for Specific Purposes, 27, 15-34.
: Ha, L., Stewart, D., Hanna P. & Smith, F. (2006). Zipf and Type-Token rules for the English, Spanish, Irish and Latin languages. Web Journal of Formal, Computational and Cognitive Linguistics, 1(8), 1-12.
: Hale, K. (1966). Kinship reflections in syntax: Some Australian languages. Word, 22, 318-324.
: Haspelmath, M. & Buchholz, O. (1998). Equative and similative constructions in the languages of Europe. En J. v. d. Auwera (Ed.), Adverbial constructions in the languages of Europe (pp. 277-334). Berlín: de Gruyter.
: Hoffmann, L. (1991). Texts and text types in LSP. En H. Schröder (Ed.), Subject-oriented texts: Languages for special purposes & text theory (pp. 158-166). Berlin: W. de Gruyter.
: Hosali, P. (1997). Collocations in Indian English. En V. Prakasam & K. Tirumalesh (Eds.), Issues in English grammar (pp. 94-99). Hyderabad: Central Institute of English and Foreign Languages.
: Janson, T. (2002). Speak: A short history of languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press .
: Joshi, A. K. & Schabes, Y. (1992). Tree-adjoining grammars and lexicalized grammars. En M. Nivat & A. Podelski (Eds.), Tree Automata and Languages (pp. 409-431). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.
: Kihm, A. (2005). Noun class, gender, and the lexicon-syntax-morphology interfaces: A comparative study of Niger-Congo and Romance languages. En G. Cinque & R. Kayne (Eds.), Comparative Syntax (pp. 459-512). Oxford: Oxford University Press .
: King de Ramírez, C. & Lafford, B. (2013). Spanish for the professions: Program design and assessment. In L. Sánchez-López (Ed.), Scholarship and Teaching on Languages for Specific Purposes (pp. 31-41). Birmingham, AL: UAB Digital Collections.
: King de Ramírez, C. (2017). Preparing students for the workplace: Heritage learners’ experience in professional community internships. In M. Long (Ed.), Languages for Specific Purposes: Trends in Curriculum Development (pp. 55-71). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press .
: Koven, M. (2001). Comparing bilinguals' quoted performances of self and others in tellings of the same experience in two languages.Language in society,30(4), 513-558.
: Kramsch, C. (1989). New directions in the study of foreign languages. ADFL Bulletin, 21(1), 4-11.
: Kramsch, C. (2014). The challenge of globalization for the teaching of foreign languages and cultures. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 11(2), 249-254.
: Lambert, W. E., Hodgson, R. C., Gardner, R. C. & Fillenbaum, S. (1960). Evaluational reactions to spoken languages. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 60(1), 44-51.
: Lavid, J. & Arús, J. (2002). Nuclear transitivity in English and Spanish: A contrastive functional study. Languages in Contrast, 4(1), 75-103.
: Lemke, J. L. (2002). Multimedia genres for scientific education and science literacy. En M. J. Schleppegrell & C. Colombi (Eds.), Developing Advanced Literacy in First and Second Languages (pp. 21-44). Mawhaw: Erlbaum.
: Leonard, L. (2014b). Specific language impairment across languages. Child development perspective, 8(1), 1-5.
: Lightbown, P. & Spada, N. (1999). How languages are learned. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
: Long, M. & Uscinski, I. (2012). Evolution of languages for specific purposes programs in the United States: 1990-2011. Modern Language Journal, 96, 173-189.
: Lundquist, L. (1991). Some considerations on the relations between text linguistics and the study of texts for specific purposes. En H. Schröder (Ed.), Subject-oriented texts: Languages for special purposes & text theory (pp. 231-243). Berlin: W. de Gruyter.
: López-Arroyo, B., Fernández-Antolín, M. & de Felipe-Boto, R. (2007). Contrasting the rhetoric of abstracts in medical discourse. Implications and applications for English-Spanish translations. Languages in Contrast, 7(1), 1-28. DOI:10.1075/lic.7.1.02lop
: MLA Ad Hoc Committee on Foreign Languages. (2007). Foreign Languages and Higher Education: New Structures for a Changed World. [on line]. Retrieved from: [238]http://www.mla.org/pdf/forlang_news_pdf.pdf
: Malinowski, B. (1923). The problem of meaning in primitive languages. En C. K. Odgen & I. A. Richards (Eds.), The Meaning of Meaning: A Study of the Influence of Language upon Thought and of the Science of Symbolism (pp. 296-336). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
: Markkanen, R., & Schröder, H. (1989). Hedging as a translation problem in scientific texts. En C. Laurén & M. Nordman (Eds.), Special Languages: From human thinking to thinking machines (pp. 171-179). Vaasa: University of Vaasa.
: Martin, J. (1997). Interpersonal meaning: Some notes on realisation. En V. Prakasam & K. Tirumalesh (Eds.), Issues in English grammar (pp. 31-49). Hyderabad: Central Institute of English and Foreign Languages.
: Martin, J. (2002). Writing history: Construing time and value in discourses of the past. En M. Schleppegrell & M. Colombi (Eds.), Developing advanced literacy in first and second languages: Meaning with power (pp. 87-118). Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.
: Martínez, G. A. (2018). Heritage languages and professional practice: Bridging social capital back to communities in language for specific purposes. Paper presented at the Kentucky Foreign Language Conference, Lexington, KY.
: McBride-Chang, C., Tardif, T., Cho, J., Shu, H., Fletcher, P., Stokes, S., Wong, A. & Leung, K. (2008). What's in a word? Morphological awareness and vocabulary knowledge in three languages. Applied Psycholinguistics, 29, 437-462.
: Medgyes, P. & Laszlo, M. (2001). The foreign language competence of Hyungarian scholars: Ten years later. In A. Ulrich (Ed.), The Dominance of English as a Language of Science: Effects on Other Languages and Language Communities (pp. 261-287). New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
: Messina, S. & Langella, A. (2015). Paraphrases V(N(A in one class of Psychological Predicates. En J. Monti, M. Silberztein, M. Monteleone & M. di Buono (Eds.), Formalising Natural Languages with NooJ 2014 (pp. 140-149). Newcastle: Cambridge.
: Mihatsch, W. (2007). The construction of vagueness: "Sort-of" expressions in Romances languages. Ámsterdam: John Benjamins.
: Mitchell, D., Cuetos, F. & Zagar, D. (1990). Reading in diferent languages: Is there a universal mechanism for parsing sentences? En D. Balota, G. Flores d'Arcais & K. Rayner (Eds.), Comprehension processes in reading (pp. 285-302). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
: Modern Language Association (2007). Foreign languages and higher education: New structures for a changed world: The report of the MLA ad hoc committee on foreign languages [on line]. Retrieved from: [158]http://www.mla.org/flreport
: Montrul, S. (2016). The Acquisition of Heritage Languages. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press .
: Moreno, A. (1997). Genre constraints across languages: Causal metatext in Spanish and English RAs. English for Specific Purposes, 16(3), 161-179.
: Moreno-Fernández, F. & Otero, J. (2008). The status and future of Spanish among the main international languages: Quantitative dimensions. International Multilingual Research Journal, 2(1-2), 67-83.
: Moskowich, I., & Crespo, B. (2019). “Arguments That Could Possibly Be Urged”: Modal Verbs and Tentativeness in the Coruña Corpus. Languages, 4(57), 1-12. [95]https://doi.org/10.3390/languages4030057
: National Standards Collaborative Board (2015). World-Readiness Standards for Learning Languages (4^th ed.). Alexandria, VA: National Standards Collaborative Board.
: Pesola, K. (2001). Antonieta Rivas Mercado: Power, culture and sexuality in post–revolutionary Mexico. Tesis Doctoral, Department of Roman Languages, Duke University, Estados Unidos de Norteamérica.
: Pinker, S. (1994). The language instinct. How the mind creates languages. New York: Harper Collins .
: Polinsky, M. & Kagan, O. (2007). Heritage languages: In the ‘wild’ and in the classroom. Language and Linguistics Compass 1(5), 368-395.
: Pustejovsky, J. (2008). From concepts to meaning. The role of lexical knowledge. En P. van Sterkenburg (Ed.), Unity and Diversity of Languages (pp. 73-84). Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
: Pym, A., Kirsten, M. & Gutiérrez-Colón Plana, M. (2013). Translation and language learning: The role of translation in the teaching of languages in the European Union. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
: Pérez Ruiz, J. (2012). Gender differences and listener responses in Spanish foreign language conversations. Languages, Literary Studies and International Studies: An International Journal, 9, 1-24.
: Pérez-Llantada, C. & Watson, M. (Eds.). (2011). Specialized Languages in the Global Village: A Multi-perspective Approach. Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Cambridge Scholars Pub .
: Rabadán, R. (2016). Proposals in meeting minutes. An English-Spanish corpus-based study. Languages in Contrast, 16(2), 213-238. DOI: 10.1075/lic.16.2.03rab
: Rose, D. (2001). Some variation in Theme across languages. Functions of Language, 8(1), 109-145.
: Roy, I. (2010). Deadjectival nominalization and the structure of the adjective. En A. Alexiadou & M. Rathert (Eds.), The syntax of nominalizations across languages and frameworks (pp. 129-158). Berlín: De Gruyter Mouton.
: Ruggiero, D. (2015). Bridging the community and institution gap: A sample course with civic engagement and language for specific purposes combined. Journal of Languages for Specific Purposes, 1(2), 35-48.
: Sager, J. & Dungworth, D. (1980). English special languages. Wiesbad: Oscar Brandstetter Verlag.
: Sager, J.C., Dungworth, D. & McDonald, P.F. (1980). English Special Languages. Principles and practice in science and technology. Wiesbaden: Brandstetter.
: Scheleppegrell, M. J. & Colombi, M. C. (2002). Developing advanced literacy in first and second languages. Londres. Mawhaw. Lawrence Erlbaum.
: Schröder, H. (1991). Linguistic and text-theoretical research on languages for special purposes. A thematic and bibliographical guide. En H. Schröder (Ed.), Subject-oriented texts. Languages for special purposes and text theory (pp. 1-48). Berlin: W. de Gruyter.
: Schröder, H. (1991). Subject-oriented texts: Languages for special purposes & text theory. Berlin: W. de Gruyter.
: Segalowitz, N., Poulsen, C. & Komoda, M. (1991). Lower level components of reading skill in higher level bilinguals: Implications for reading instruction. En J. H. Hulstijn & J. F. Matter (Eds.), Reading in two languages (pp. 15-30). The Netherlands: AILA Review.
: Shaw, P. (2003). Evaluation and promotion across languages. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2(4), 343-357.
: Silberztein, M. (2016). Formalizing natural languages. The NooJ approach. Londres: ISTE.
: Similarly, Zupnik (1994: 340) defines deixis as ‘a pragmatic phenomenon’, explaining it through “the relationship between the structure of languages and the contexts in which they are used.”
: Siridetkoon, P. & Dewaele, J.-M. (2017). Ideal self and ought-to self of simultaneous learners of multiple foreign languages. International Journal of Multilingualism, 15(4), 313-328. Doi: 10.1080/14790718.2017.1293063
: Spaine Long, S. (2013). The unexpected Spanish for specific purposes professor: A tale of two institutions. In L. Sánchez-López (Ed.), Scholarship and Teaching on Languages for Specific Purposes (pp. 88-98). Birmingham, AL: UAB Digital Collections .
: Stark, E. (2016). Relative clauses. En A. Ledgeway & M. Maiden (Eds.), The Oxford Guide to the Romance Languages (pp. 1029-1040). Oxford: Oxford University Press .
: Swales, J. (1981). Aspects of Article Introductions. Birmingham: Aston University Languages Study.
: Systemic-Functional theory will once more prove to be a suitable framework, not only for linguistic description at a general level, but also for addressing specific issues in particular languages.
: Sánchez-López, L. (2013). Service-learning course design for languages for specific purposes programs. Hispania, 96(2), 383-396.
: Sánchez-López, L. (Ed.). (2013a). Scholarship and Teaching on Languages for Specific Purposes. Birmingham, AL: UAB Digital Collections .
: Sánchez-López, L., Long, M. & Lafford, B. (2017). New directions in LSP research in U.S. higher education. In M. Long (Ed.), Languages for Specific Purposes: Trends in Curriculum Development (pp. 13-36). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press .
: Taavitsainen, I., Pahta, P. & Mäkinen, M. (2006). Towards a corpus-based history of specialised languages. In R. Facchinetti & M. Rissanen (Eds.), Middle English Medical Texts. Corpus-Based Studies in Diachronic English (pp. 79-94). Bern: Peter Lang .
: Tarone, E. (1977). Conscious communication strategies in interlanguage: A progress report. In D. H. Brown (Ed.), 11th Annual Convention of Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages (pp. 194-203). Washington, D.C.: TESOL.
: The National Standards Collaborative Board (2015). World-Readiness Standards for Learning Languages (4^th ed.). Alexandria, VA: Author.
: Tong, L., Changjie, T. & Jie, Z. (2001). Web document filtering technique based on natural language understanding, Int'lJ. Computer Processing of Oriental Languages, 14(2), 279-291.
: Valdés, G. (1995). The Teaching of Minority Languages as Academic Subjects: Pedagogical and Theoretical Challenges. The Modern Language Journal, 79(3), 299-328.
: Valdés, G. (2001). Heritage language students: Profiles and possibilities. In J. K. Peyton, D. A. Ranard & S. McGinnis (Eds.), Heritage Languages in America: Preserving a National Resource (pp. 37-77). McHenry, IL: Delta Systems Company.
: Van Els, T. (2001). The European Union, its institutions and its languages: Some language political observations. Current Issues in Language Planning, 2(4), 311-60.
: Villanueva, A. M. (2011). Effects of the typological distance between languages and of the number of known languages on the acquisition of the syntax of Spanish as a foreign language. Núcleo, 23(28), 217-251.
: Weber, S. (1991). Communicative acts and the constitution of scientific and technical texts. En H. Schröder (Ed.), Subject - oriented texts. Languages for special purposes and text theory (pp. 267-306). Berlin: W. de Gruyter.
: Wiley, T. G. (2001). On defining heritage languages and their speakers. In J. K. Peyton, D. A. Ranard & S. Mcginnis (Eds.), Heritage Languages in America: Preserving a National Resource (pp. 29-36). McHenry, IL: Center for Applied Linguistics .
: Wiley, T. G., Peyton, J. K., Christian, D., Moore, S. C. K. & Liu, N. (Eds.). (2015). Handbook of Heritage, Community, and Native American Languages in the United States. New York, NY: Routledge .
: Wright, S. (2011). Language and nation building in Europe. En B. Kortmann & J. van der Auwera (Eds.), The languages and linguistics of Europe: A comprehensive guide, (pp. 775-788). Berlín/Boston: Walter de Gruyter.
: Yeldham, M. (2009). Approaches to second language listening instruction: Investigating the ‘top-down/bottom-up debate’. Tesis doctoral, School of Languages & Linguistics, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
: Ziegler, J. & Goswami, U. (2005). Reading acquisition, developmental dyslexia, and skilled reading across languages: A psycholinguistic grain size theory. Psychological Bulletin, 131(1), 3-29.
: [159][flecha.gif] Correspondencia: Vania Barraza ([160]vbarraza@email.arizona.edu). Tel.: (520) 621 5521. Dept. of Spanish & Portuguese, University of Arizona, Modern Languages 534. P.O. Box 210067, Tucson, AZ 85721-0067, Estados Unidos.