Why Don't Students Talk? Causes of Foreign Language Communication Apprehension in English Classes: A Comparison of High Apprehensive and Low Apprehensive Upper Secondary Students.

OBJECTIVES. Oral foreign language skills are an integral part of one's social, academic and professional competence. This can be problematic for those suffering from foreign language communication apprehension (CA), or a fear of speaking a foreign language. CA manifests itself, for example, through feelings of anxiety and tension, physical arousal and avoidance of foreign language communication situations. According to scholars, foreign language CA may impede the language learning process significantly and have detrimental effects on one's language learning, academic achievement and career prospects. Drawing on upper secondary students' subjective experiences of communication situations in English as a foreign language, this study seeks, first, to describe, analyze and interpret why upper secondary students experience English language communication apprehension in English as a foreign language (EFL) classes. Second, this study seeks to analyse what the most anxiety-arousing oral production tasks in EFL classes are, and which features of different oral production tasks arouse English language communication apprehension and why. The ultimate objectives of the present study are to raise teachers' awareness of foreign language CA and its features, manifestations and impacts in foreign language classes as well as to suggest possible ways to minimize the anxiety-arousing features in foreign language classes. METHODS. The data was collected in two phases by means of six-part Likert-type questionnaires and theme interviews, and analysed using both quantitative and qualitative methods. The questionnaire data was collected in spring 2008. The respondents were 122 first-year upper secondary students, 68 % of whom were girls and 31 % of whom were boys. The data was analysed by statistical methods using SPSS software. The theme interviews were conducted in spring 2009. The interviewees were 11 second-year upper secondary students aged 17 to 19, who were chosen by purposeful selection on the basis of their English language CA level measured in the questionnaires. Six interviewees were classified as high apprehensives and five as low apprehensives according to their score in the foreign language CA scale in the questionnaires. The interview data was coded and thematized using the technique of content analysis. The analysis and interpretation of the data drew on a comparison of the self-reports of the highly apprehensive and low apprehensive upper secondary students. RESULTS. The causes of English language CA in EFL classes as reported by the students were both internal and external in nature. The most notable causes were a low self-assessed English proficiency, a concern over errors, a concern over evaluation, and a concern over the impression made on others. Other causes related to a high English language CA were a lack of authentic oral practise in EFL classes, discouraging teachers and negative experiences of learning English, unrealistic internal demands for oral English performance, high external demands and expectations for oral English performance, the conversation partner's higher English proficiency, and the audience's large size and unfamiliarity. The most anxiety-arousing oral production tasks in EFL classes were presentations or speeches with or without notes in front of the class, acting in front of the class, pair debates with the class as audience, expressing thoughts and ideas to the class, presentations or speeches without notes while seated, group debates with the class as audience, and answering to the teacher's questions involuntarily. The main features affecting the anxiety-arousing potential of an oral production task were a high degree of attention, a large audience, a high degree of evaluation, little time for preparation, little linguistic support, and a long duration.

Orphan nuclear receptor subfamily NR4A their interplay with other nuclear receptors and functions in osteoblasts

Nurr1, NGFI-B and Nor1 (NR4A2, NR4A1 and NR4A3, respectively) belong to the NR4A subfamily of nuclear receptors. The NR4A receptors are orphan nuclear receptors which means that activating or repressing ligands for these receptors have not been found. NR4A expression is rapidly induced in response to various stimuli including growth factors and the parathyroid hormone (PTH). The studies concerning the NR4A receptors in the central nervous system have demonstrated that they have a major role in the development and function of the dopaminergic neurons of the midbrain and in regulating hypothalamus-pituitary-adrenal-axis. However, the peripheral functions of the NR4A family are largely unknown. Cultured mouse primary osteoblasts, a preosteoblastic cell line and several osteoblastic cell lines were used to investigate the role of NR4A receptors in osteoblasts. NR4A receptors were shown to directly bind to and activate the promoter of the osteopontin gene (OPN) in osteoblastic cells, thus regulating its expression. OPN is a major bone matrix protein expressed throughout the differentiation of preosteoblastic cells into osteoblasts. The activation of the OPN promoter was shown to be dependent on the activation function-1 located in the N-terminal part of Nurr1 and to occur in both monomeric and RXR heterodimeric forms of NR4A receptors. Furthermore, PTH was shown to upregulate OPN expression through the NR4A family. It was also demonstrated that the fibroblast growth factor-8b (FGF-8b) induces the expression of NR4A receptors in osteoblasts as immediate early genes. This induction involved phosphatidylinositol-3 kinase, protein kinase C, and mitogen activated protein kinase, which are all major pathways of FGF signalling. Nurr1 and NGFI-B were shown to induce the proliferation of preosteoblastic cells and to reduce their apoptosis. FGF-8b was shown to stimulate the proliferation of osteoblastic cells through the NR4A receptors. These results suggest that NR4A receptors have a role both in the differentiation of osteoblasts and in the proliferation and apoptosis of preosteoblast. The NR4A receptors were found to bind to the same response element on OPN as the members of the NR3B family of orphan receptors do. Mutual repression was observed between the NR4A receptors and the NR3B receptors. This repression was shown to be dependent on the DNA-binding domains of both receptor families, but to result neither from the competition of DNA binding nor from the competition for coactivators. As the repression was dependent on the relative expression levels of the NR4As and NR3Bs, it seems likely that the ratio of the receptors mediates their activity on their response elements. Rapid induction of the NR4As in response to various stimuli and differential expression of the NR3Bs can effectively control the gene activation by the NR4A receptors. NR4A receptors can bind DNA as monomers, and Nurr1 and NGFI-B can form permissive heterodimers with the retinoid X receptor (RXR). Permissive heterodimers can be activated with RXR agonists, unlike non-permissive heterodimers, which are formed by RXR and retinoic acid receptor or thyroid hormone receptor (RAR and TR, respectively). Non-permissive heterodimers can only be activated by the agonists of the heterodimerizing partner. The mechanisms behind differential response to RXR agonists have remained unresolved. As there are no activating or repressing ligands for the NR4A receptors, it would be important to find out, how they are regulated. Permissiviness of Nurr1/RXR heterodimers was linked to the N-terminal part of Nurr1 ligand-binding domain. This region has previously been shown to mediate the interaction between NRs and corepressors. Non-permissive RAR and TR, permissive Nurr1 and NGFI-B, and RXR were overexpressed with corepressors silencing mediator for retinoic acid and thyroid hormone receptors (SMRT), and with nuclear receptor corepressor in several cell lines. Nurr1 and NGFI-B were found to be repressed by SMRT. The interaction of RXR heterodimers with corepressors was weak in permissive heterodimers and much stronger in non-permissive heterodimers. Non-permissive heterodimers also released corepressors only in response to the agonist of the heterodimeric partner of RXR. In the permissive Nurr1/RXR heterodimer, however, SMRT was released following the treatment with RXR agonists. Corepressor release in response to ligands was found to differentiate permissive heterodimers from non-permissive ones. Corepressors were thus connected to the regulation of NR4A functions. In summary, the studies presented here linked the NR4A family of orphan nuclear receptors to the regulation of osteoblasts. Nurr1 and NGFI-B were found to control the proliferation and apoptosis of preosteoblasts. The studies also demonstrated that cross-talk with the NR3B receptors controls the activity of these orphan receptors. The results clarified the mechanism of permissiviness of RXR-heterodimers. New information was obtained on the regulation and functions of NR4A receptors, for which the ligands are unknown.

Participes présents et gérondifs en traduction finnoise : perte ou changement de valeur ?

Les participes présents apparaissent, entre autres, dans des constructions à prédication seconde détachées : (1) Intervenant hier soir à Ankara, […], Vladimir Poutine s’est risqué à […]. (Le Figaro 7.12.2004 : 4) Même si les gérondifs, formes adverbiales du verbe (« converbes », cf. Haspelmath & König 1995), n’ont pas d’incidence nominale, contrairement aux participes présents, formes adjectivales du verbe, et ne sont donc pas toujours comptés parmi les constructions à prédication seconde (p.ex. Neveu 1998), les deux ont des emplois assez proches : dans des énoncés du type (2a-b), le participe adjoint peut être paraphrasé par un gérondif, même si son statut fonctionnel n’est pas le même (Halmøy, 2003 : 156-157) : (2a) Arrivant à Paris, Emile a proposé à Léa de [...]. (2b) En arrivant à Paris, Emile a proposé à Léa de[...]. (Halmøy, 2003 : 157) Le finnois ne connaît ni ce genre de constructions détachés ni de forme appelée ‘gérondif’, et les deux participes présents finnois (actif et passif) ne correspondent jamais à un participe présent détaché français : en plus de subordonnées, on trouve à leur place le deuxième infinitif, soit à l’inessif, soit à l’instructif, formes nominales qu’on trouve également dans la traduction des gérondifs : (3a) […] ? me demanda-t-elle sèchement en me montrant l’une des lignes incriminées. (Nothomb, p. 62) […] : hän kysyi minulta kuivakkaasti näyttäen erästä Unajin moittimaa riviä. (Suni, p. 4) (3b) L’espace d’un instant, il sourit, croyant que […] je m’étais trompée de commodités. (Nothomb, p. 138-139) Hetken hän hymyili luullen, että minä […] olin erehtynyt mukavuuslaitoksesta. (Suni, p. 94) : Dans cette communication, nous examinerons quatre traductions littéraires en nous demandant dans quels cas et de quelle manière la différence entre le participe et le gérondif a éventuellement été prise en considération.

Language universals and linguistic complexity : Three case studies in core argument marking

In this dissertation I study language complexity from a typological perspective. Since the structuralist era, it has been assumed that local complexity differences in languages are balanced out in cross-linguistic comparisons and that complexity is not affected by the geopolitical or sociocultural aspects of the speech community. However, these assumptions have seldom been studied systematically from a typological point of view. My objective is to define complexity so that it is possible to compare it across languages and to approach its variation with the methods of quantitative typology. My main empirical research questions are: i) does language complexity vary in any systematic way in local domains, and ii) can language complexity be affected by the geographical or social environment? These questions are studied in three articles, whose findings are summarized in the introduction to the dissertation. In order to enable cross-language comparison, I measure complexity as the description length of the regularities in an entity; I separate it from difficulty, focus on local instead of global complexity, and break it up into different types. This approach helps avoid the problems that plagued earlier metrics of language complexity. My approach to grammar is functional-typological in nature, and the theoretical framework is basic linguistic theory. I delimit the empirical research functionally to the marking of core arguments (the basic participants in the sentence). I assess the distributions of complexity in this domain with multifactorial statistical methods and use different sampling strategies, implementing, for instance, the Greenbergian view of universals as diachronic laws of type preference. My data come from large and balanced samples (up to approximately 850 languages), drawn mainly from reference grammars. The results suggest that various significant trends occur in the marking of core arguments in regard to complexity and that complexity in this domain correlates with population size. These results provide evidence that linguistic patterns interact among themselves in terms of complexity, that language structure adapts to the social environment, and that there may be cognitive mechanisms that limit complexity locally. My approach to complexity and language universals can therefore be successfully applied to empirical data and may serve as a model for further research in these areas.