Language Learning最新文献

{"title":"The Postprint Pledge – Toward a Culture of Researcher-Driven Initiatives: A Commentary on “(Why) Are Open Research Practices the Future for the Study of Language Learning?”","authors":"Ali H. Al-Hoorie, Phil Hiver","doi":"10.1111/lang.12577","DOIUrl":"10.1111/lang.12577","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51371,"journal":{"name":"Language Learning","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.4,"publicationDate":"2023-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48239847","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Alignment of Top-Down Policies With Emerging Bottom-Up Practices: A Commentary on “(Why) Are Open Research Practices the Future for the Study of Language Learning?”","authors":"Mikael Laakso","doi":"10.1111/lang.12572","DOIUrl":"10.1111/lang.12572","url":null,"abstract":"<p>In their article, Marsden and Morgan-Short comprehensively review the current state and development trajectories for key areas within open research practices, both in general as well as more particularly in the context of language sciences. As the article reveals, the scope of open research practices is enormous and essentially touches upon every aspect of performing and interacting with research. The authors touch upon the lack of an established metascience within language sciences that would help inform and guide development of research practices, but, as I see it, the problem is universal, and there would be benefit in creating a stronger and more cohesive metascience discipline in general. While researchers have established practices of research, education, and dedicated scholarly communication outlets within the philosophy of science, history of science, information science, and higher education policy, metascience has remained an area where the discussion is highly distributed and appears sporadically across diverse research disciplines. As Marsden and Morgan-Short's review demonstrates, there are a lot of open questions relating to how to move forward on a global scale in the best interest of research and researchers. A more cohesive core of metascience would aid in the creation of immediately useful knowledge.</p><p>One key perspective I would like to put forward to facilitate further structured reflection on the complex challenges surrounding open research practices in language sciences as well as in other disciplines is that of alignment seeking between top-down policies (e.g., mandates by funders or institutions for making publications or data open, institutional involvement in research infrastructures) and bottom-up practices (researchers taking particular practices into use by themselves, driven primarily by intrinsic motivation). Researchers in general have a lot of autonomy within their work, an aspect which creates a unique environment for the creation and wider adoption of new practices. The initial spark for many (I dare say most) open research practices and services for operating them have often been spawned as researcher-driven initiatives, for example, IRIS (Marsden &amp; Mackey, <span>2014</span>) and OASIS (Marsden et al., <span>2018</span>) for research in language learning, without top-down requirement or enforcement. Today science policy, particularly within the European Union, is heavily influencing the uptake of open research practices by introducing requirements and monitoring for their compliance both through the open science requirements stated in the grant agreements of their own research funding instruments but also more generally for member countries to implement and report back on. However, if the requirements given top down are experienced as irrelevant and disconnected from the research context as seen by researchers, there is risk of alienation and a negative outcome for adoption (Lilja, <span>2020</span>)","PeriodicalId":51371,"journal":{"name":"Language Learning","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.4,"publicationDate":"2023-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/lang.12572","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42561671","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Where is Community Involvement in Open Science? A Commentary on “(Why) Are Open Research Practices the Future for the Study of Language Learning?”","authors":"Teresa Girolamo,&nbsp;she/her,&nbsp;Lindsay K. Butler,&nbsp;she/her,&nbsp;Samantha Ghali,&nbsp;she/her,&nbsp;Kristina T. Johnson,&nbsp;she/her","doi":"10.1111/lang.12574","DOIUrl":"10.1111/lang.12574","url":null,"abstract":"<p>As an interdisciplinary research team spanning linguistics, engineering, speech–language pathology, and education focusing on communication disorders, we found Marsden and Morgan-Short's state-of-the-art article extremely relevant. We endorse the importance of open science to language research and appreciate its potential for advancing equity. Yet we argue that the current debate on open science is incomplete—lacking sufficient community and stakeholder involvement, particularly for individuals who have language disorders and who are racially and ethnically minoritized.</p><p>Marsden and Morgan-Short have claimed that open science methods will support inclusivity and diversity of researchers, participants, and research questions. We agree but argue that the open science debate as it is neglects a population deeply impacted by open science practices: individuals with language disorders, and specifically, communication disorders. For example, nearly one third of autistic individuals over the age of five years are minimally speaking, with no spoken language or a small number of single words and fixed phrases (Tager-Flusberg &amp; Kasari, <span>2013</span>). Yet research with these individuals has declined over the past few decades (Stedman et al., <span>2019</span>), exacerbating the knowledge gap about language acquisition in this population and in the full population. Open science in language research must center inclusivity to share resources and expand access to marginalized individuals with communication disorders (e.g., autistic individuals who are minimally verbal or have language impairment), with the broader aim of advancing the advocacy base for their needs and ensuring that our understanding of language development is broadly representative.</p><p>Marsden and Morgan-Short have also suggested that data sharing may not be possible or ethical for research with vulnerable participants such as those with language disorders and/or co-occurring intellectual disability. However, we argue that, while the inclusion of these populations in open science requires careful consideration, it should not be interpreted as a reason for exclusion. Rather, mindful study design—purposefully designed with the possibility of data sharing and open research—and dynamic informed consent can help overcome these challenges. For example, during consent, researchers should be transparent in explaining the implications of open science, including the specifics of the current research project, and also provide participants with the choice to opt-in to the sharing of their data as well as opportunities to ask questions, learn about and demonstrate understanding of their rights and terms pertaining to open science, and access materials in formats responsive to their needs (e.g., visual supports). These suggestions align with best practices from self-advocates with intellectual disability and community stakeholders (Bigby et al., <span>2014</span>; Nicholson et al., <span","PeriodicalId":51371,"journal":{"name":"Language Learning","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.4,"publicationDate":"2023-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/lang.12574","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44760461","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"On Linguicism, Epistemic Injustice, and Research in Language-in-Education: A Commentary on “Midadolescents’ Language Learning at School: Toward More Just and Scientifically Rigorous Practices in Research and Education”","authors":"Ahmar Mahboob","doi":"10.1111/lang.12570","DOIUrl":"10.1111/lang.12570","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Current research in (language) education is rightly concerned about the potential of linguicism and epistemic injustice. Linguicism can be broadly defined as excluding and/or silencing students’ other languages and epistemic injustice as excluding and/or silencing students’ ways of knowing, doing, and being. Thus, any attempts at reducing or eliminating the potential of linguicism and epistemic injustice is a positive move which can help in creating an inclusive and enabling environment for students from diverse backgrounds.</p><p>At the same time, many language-in-education researchers/practitioners avoid defining language, which is not wholly their fault; but it does impact their work. Traditional linguists have typically avoided defining language. Instead, they typically contrast human language with nonhuman communication and use these differences to establish the discipline of linguistics. Other approaches to linguistics have attempted to define language. For example, systemic functional linguistics sees language as a semogenic system; however, language can be defined in other ways as well. Three additional ways of defining language are described below (see Mahboob, <span>2020</span>, for a detailed discussion of these definitions and their social and environmental consequences). Drawing on all these definitions of language can contribute to the goals of pedagogies of voices (Uccelli &amp; Boix Mansilla, 2020/<span>2022</span>) that Uccelli has proposed in her target article.</p>","PeriodicalId":51371,"journal":{"name":"Language Learning","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.4,"publicationDate":"2023-04-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/lang.12570","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41419787","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Heading South, Unmuting Multilingualisms: A Commentary on “Midadolescents’ Language Learning at School: Toward More Just and Scientifically Rigorous Practices in Research and Education”","authors":"Kathleen Heugh","doi":"10.1111/lang.12573","DOIUrl":"10.1111/lang.12573","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The central thesis of Uccelli's target article is a dire need to identify the causes of inequalities in literacy and language education from the fourth grade, and which pedagogies best eliminate them. Uccelli's quest for empirical, pedagogical, and theoretical insights to counter injustice, and to give voice to rather than silence students, is urgent and welcome. Effective redress of structural inequalities associated with language and literacy in formal education, however, cannot occur through a universalist worldview embedded in a northern episteme and in one language, English. It is time to turn to and learn from societies that hold pluriversal worldviews, predominantly beyond the Euro-North. My concern in this commentary is mostly with students who live in highly multilingual low-income countries of the South. It is also with those who migrate to high-income, less multilingual societies where challenges of diversity increase rather than resolve.</p><p>I argue that linguists and teachers need to understand the relationships among cognition and development of bilingual/multilingual capability and literacy; plural ways of knowing, believing, and being; and knowledge exchange and production. These relationships are invisibilized in a universalist northern-facing curriculum, pedagogy and assessment regime, and texts published only in English. English cannot reflect the epistemological, ontological, or cosmological nuances and pluralities expressed in the 7,000 or more language communities of the world, nor do its texts include extensive knowledge produced beyond English. Yet, there is much to be learned from the expertise in secular and faith-based bilingual and multilingual education and in languages and scripts that are neither English nor Latin. Scholars currently enjoying privileged access to academic publishing opportunities (in English), to elevated citation counts, and to generous research grants cannot afford to ignore studies in multilingualisms from Africa and South Asia much longer.</p><p>Yes, there is space for the horizontal practices of translanguaging that northern-facing scholarship seems to have discovered only recently in the to-ing and fro-ing between languages, especially in spoken discourse, familiar to all bilingual and multilingual peoples, and included in more familiarly known codemixing, codeswitching. However, some 2,000 years of formalized clerical and scholarly teaching in Africa and India show that pedagogical value in written translation between clearly identified languages is marked. This has also been evident in the last 120 years of research on bilingual/multilingual education in formal, informal, and nonformal schooling in these settings (Alidou et al., <span>2006</span>; Heugh, <span>2023</span>; Mohanty, <span>2018</span>). To achieve equality of access to further education and career opportunities, students need vertical expertise in written translation in both their most well-known and used language and one","PeriodicalId":51371,"journal":{"name":"Language Learning","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.4,"publicationDate":"2023-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/lang.12573","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48132157","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The Importance of Dialogue for Justice and Learning: A Commentary on “Midadolescents’ Language Learning at School: Toward More Just and Scientifically Rigorous Practices in Research and Education”","authors":"Mary J. Schleppegrell","doi":"10.1111/lang.12567","DOIUrl":"10.1111/lang.12567","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Uccelli focuses readers’ attention on two language-based challenges for educational excellence and equity in today's adolescent classrooms. One challenge is the diversity of social identities, where students from different linguistic and cultural backgrounds are often taught by teachers who do not share their cultural backgrounds or experiences. Her own university students reported that their teachers never showed interest in their experiences or languages and told them that the ways that they talked would hold them back. Some were sanctioned for enacting their bilingual identities at school. Students cannot realize their full potential in contexts where they encounter linguicism and racism and where their ways of talking are negatively judged and their meanings not heard.</p><p>The second challenge is that midadolescence is also a time when the linguistic demands of learning increase, with variation across subject areas in ways of participating in developing and critiquing knowledge. At the same time, teachers are currently seldom well prepared to be explicit about the ways language works to make meanings in their fields of study or to support students in development of reading, speaking, and writing in their disciplinary areas. Uccelli's research focuses on this challenge, identifying linguistic features of the discourses through which knowledge is presented and critiques are developed. My research, too, has focused on making this hidden curriculum (Christie, <span>1985</span>) of expectations for language learning visible and explicit (Schleppegrell, <span>2004, 2020</span>). But success with confronting this second challenge, as with other educational challenges, depends on overcoming linguicism and racism.</p><p>Language-in-education research that is grounded in a social semiotic perspective can contribute to overcoming linguicism and racism by recognizing that interpersonal relationships in the classroom are enacted simultaneously with engagement in knowledge construction. <i>Languaging</i> is the primary social process through which learning is achieved in school contexts, as knowledge is socially constructed (Halliday, <span>2007</span>). Every utterance shapes classroom meaning-making by simultaneously construing interpersonal and ideational meanings as participants position themselves and others while sharing experience and knowledge. Those who speak in the classroom are always displaying aspects of their identities, so a tenor of mutual respect for differences and openness to listening for meaning are a prerequisite. Listeners who do not respect others’ language and respond in ways that reject or discount them and their language perpetuate injustice and inequity and hinder the learning of all (Flores &amp; Rosa, <span>2015</span>).</p><p>To elaborate on Uccelli's point, students are not just “<i>potential</i> contributors to <i>later</i> scholarly endeavors [emphasis added].” All students bring cultural and linguistic resources that","PeriodicalId":51371,"journal":{"name":"Language Learning","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.4,"publicationDate":"2023-03-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/lang.12567","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48901140","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Modeling Bilingualism as a Dynamic Phenomenon in Healthy and Neurologically Affected Speakers Across the Lifespan: A Commentary on “Computational Modeling of Bilingual Language Learning: Current Models and Future Directions”","authors":"Claudia Peñaloza,&nbsp;Uli Grasemann,&nbsp;Risto Miikkulainen,&nbsp;Swathi Kiran","doi":"10.1111/lang.12566","DOIUrl":"10.1111/lang.12566","url":null,"abstract":"<p>In their review article, Li and Xu offered an insightful overview of the contributions and limitations of computational models of bilingual language learning and processing to our current understanding of the bilingual mind. They further proposed joining cross-disciplinary efforts toward building a computational account that links cognitive theory and neurobiological accounts of bilingualism as part of their suggested future research agenda. We agree with Li and Xu's suggestions and further propose that (a) the scope of computational models of bilingual language learning and processing should be expanded to include other perspectives: language learning context, maintenance, and decay of linguistic competence and bilingual language breakdown and that (b) existing modeling efforts already work toward addressing these areas, answering the proposed desiderata for good computational models.</p><p>As reviewed by Li and Xu, developmental computational models have helped researchers understand how language representation emerges as a function of a speaker's bilingual experience. However, language learning context must be better accounted for. Specifically, bilingual language learning poses additional challenges for behavioral research when studies seek to address more naturalistic learning contexts such as second language (L2) acquisition via immersion in a foreign language context versus L2 acquisition in the classroom, and the involvement of implicit and explicit learning mechanisms constitutes an important axis of differentiation in this regard. Thus, while computational models include data-driven learning mechanisms to discover and organize linguistic representations as indicated by Li and Xu, future models should incorporate testable theory-driven implicit and explicit mechanisms for language learning (Peñaloza et al., <span>2022</span>). Existing computational models of bilingual lexical access (Peñaloza et al., <span>2019</span>) could incorporate such mechanisms to help test the contributions of these mechanisms to bilingual language learning.</p><p>In addition, in modeling bilingual learning, both maintenance of the acquired linguistic knowledge and the reverse decay process are equally important in the lifespan timeline. For example, the extant literature makes it clear that contextual changes may reduce bilingual exposure and use that affect young and older bilinguals, yet bilingual processing decay in older adults can be further confounded with age-related language and cognitive decline (Goral et al., <span>2008</span>). In supporting Li and Xu's proposal for cross-disciplinary work, we argue that computational modeling could implement and test assumptions from closely related fields including memory theory (Mickan et al., <span>2019</span>) to gain understanding on how speakers’ language processing abilities in their first language (L1) and their L2 change with contextual experience and over the lifespan.</p><p>Cognitive control is a doma","PeriodicalId":51371,"journal":{"name":"Language Learning","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.4,"publicationDate":"2023-03-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/lang.12566","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"64411276","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Cognitive and Sociopsychological Individual Differences, Experience, and Naturalistic Second Language Speech Learning: A Longitudinal Study","authors":"Hui Sun,&nbsp;Kazuya Saito,&nbsp;Jean-Marc Dewaele","doi":"10.1111/lang.12561","DOIUrl":"10.1111/lang.12561","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This study longitudinally examined the effects of cognitive and sociopsychological individual differences (aptitude, motivation, personality) and the quantity and quality of second language (L2) experience on L2 speech gains in naturalistic settings. We elicited L2 spontaneous speech from 50 Chinese learners of English at the beginning and the end of their first 4 months of study abroad. Then, we linked the participants’ gains in comprehensibility (ease of understanding) and accentedness (linguistic nativelikeness) to their individual difference and experience profiles. The participants’ gains in comprehensibility were associated mainly with the amount of their interaction with fluent English speakers during immersion and secondarily with certain cognitive (grammatical inferencing) and sociopsychological (extraversion) individual differences. Furthermore, the amount of interactive L2 use mediated the effect of sociopsychological individual differences (extraversion and potentially ideal L2 self). In contrast, gains in accentedness tended to be less subject to experience effects but could be affected by certain pronunciation-related cognitive individual differences (phonemic coding).</p>","PeriodicalId":51371,"journal":{"name":"Language Learning","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.4,"publicationDate":"2023-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/lang.12561","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45085915","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Premises, Pitfalls, and Possibilities of Undoing Competence: A Response to Open Peer Commentaries","authors":"Jonathan Rosa,&nbsp;Nelson Flores","doi":"10.1111/lang.12564","DOIUrl":"10.1111/lang.12564","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51371,"journal":{"name":"Language Learning","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.4,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41320275","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"School-Relevant Language As a Meaning-Making Activity – A CLIL Perspective: A Commentary on “Midadolescents’ Language Learning at School: Toward More Just and Scientifically Rigorous Practices in Research and Education”","authors":"Tarja Nikula","doi":"10.1111/lang.12565","DOIUrl":"10.1111/lang.12565","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Paola Uccelli's target article for <i>Language Learning</i>’s 75^th Jubilee encompasses both an extensive research review of the role of language in education and a call for more just and rigorous practices in research and education. In this commentary, I will focus on points of convergence between the Core Analytical Language Skills framework (CALS) presented in the target article and the research perspective on content and language integrated learning (CLIL), an approach where second/foreign language is used for the learning and teaching of both content and language. I will also point at ways in which CLIL goes beyond CALS by offering a comprehensive view of school-relevant language as a meaning-making activity. As such, the CLIL perspective inevitably requires shifting the focus from language to its role in learning and teaching (see Llinares et al., <span>2012</span>).</p><p>Content and language interconnection has featured strongly in CLIL research. Nikula et al. (<span>2016</span>) argued that conceptualizing integration requires three intertwined perspectives: curriculum and pedagogy (i.e., planning integration), participant perspectives (how those involved in CLIL perceive integration), and classroom practices (how integration is realized in classrooms). CLIL can only succeed with attention to all these perspectives. The same, I believe, applies to CALS as each of these perspectives is implicated in Uccelli's description of the framework and its pedagogical application potential.</p><p>Uccelli highlights the high-utility nature of CALS, namely, that its language tools and resources are shared across content areas and support learning across the curriculum. A key role is accorded to recognizing that “scientific learning and reasoning have linguistic correlates” and to identifying those correlates. In comparison, CLIL-based frameworks attune to both general and subject-specific aspects when theorizing content and language as intertwined. One such framework is that of cognitive discourse functions (Dalton-Puffer, <span>2013</span>). Cognitive discourse functions help map cognitive learning goals and their linguistic realizations. The seven broad core functions identified are classify, define, describe, evaluate, explain, explore, and report. The cognitive discourse functions, like CALS, are high-utility in depicting communicative functions that feature across subjects. However, cognitive discourse functions also capture the subject-specific nature of knowledge building as they appear in different constellations in different subjects. Attention to these constellations can help teachers move beyond associating subject-specificity with terms and vocabulary and towards seeing it as subject-relevant knowledge building. The construct of cognitive discourse functions is thus deeply functional, foregrounding communicative intentions and language as meaning making.</p><p>Alongside cognitive discourse functions, also the construct of plur","PeriodicalId":51371,"journal":{"name":"Language Learning","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.4,"publicationDate":"2023-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/lang.12565","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44447932","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}