The Where, Who, When and Why of Medieval Welsh Prose Texts: Some Methodological Considerations

Rodway, S. (2007). The Where, Who, When and Why of Medieval Welsh Prose Texts: Some Methodological Considerations. Studia Celtica. 41, pp.47-89. RAE2008

Dialogic Signals In Argumentative Discussions of Advanced Polish Learners Of English

The first part of the paper deals with characteristics of classroom interaction as a type of institutional talk in a conversational analytic perspective. Next, the thesis is discussed concerning developing learners' interactional competence to foster learner discursive independence in argumentative discussions in English as a foreign language. Finally, after a short review of dialogic signals, the article presents a preliminary analysis of selected dialogic signals: evaluating reformulations and piggybacking as the ways of achieving reciprocity in argumentative discussions.

Dialogic Signals In Argumentative Discussions of Advanced Polish Learners Of English

The first part of the paper deals with characteristics of classroom interaction as a type of institutional talk in a conversational analytic perspective. Next, the thesis is discussed concerning developing learners' interactional competence to foster learner discursive independence in argumentative discussions in English as a foreign language. Finally, after a short review of dialogic signals, the article presents a preliminary analysis of selected dialogic signals: evaluating reformulations and piggybacking as the ways of achieving reciprocity in argumentative discussions.

Memorability as a measure of processing: a unit analysis of prose and list learning.

The percentage of subjects recalling each unit in a list or prose passage is considered as a dependent measure. When the same units are recalled in different tasks, processing is assumed to be the same; when different units are recalled, processing is assumed to be different. Two collections of memory tasks are presented, one for lists and one for prose. The relations found in these two collections are supported by an extensive reanalysis of the existing prose memory literature. The same set of words were learned by 13 different groups of subjects under 13 different conditions. Included were intentional free-recall tasks, incidental free recall following lexical decision, and incidental free recall following ratings of orthographic distinctiveness and emotionality. Although the nine free-recall tasks varied widely with regard to the amount of recall, the relative probability of recall for the words was very similar among the tasks. Imagery encoding and recognition produced relative probabilities of recall that were different from each other and from the free-recall tasks. Similar results were obtained with a prose passage. A story was learned by 13 different groups of subjects under 13 different conditions. Eight free-recall tasks, which varied with respect to incidental or intentional learning, retention interval, and the age of the subjects, produced similar relative probabilities of recall, whereas recognition and prompted recall produced relative probabilities of recall that were different from each other and from the free-recall tasks. A review of the prose literature was undertaken to test the generality of these results. Analysis of variance is the most common statistical procedure in this literature. If the relative probability of recall of units varied across conditions, a units by condition interaction would be expected. For the 12 studies that manipulated retention interval, an average of 21% of the variance was accounted for by the main effect of retention interval, 17% by the main effect of units, and only 2% by the retention interval by units interaction. Similarly, for the 12 studies that varied the age of the subjects, 6% of the variance was accounted for by the main effect of age, 32% by the main effect of units, and only 1% by the interaction of age by units.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Dialogic Evidence: Documentation of Ephemeral Events

Performance and documentation have long been characterised as oppositional practices, separated by competing voices which argue the virtues of disappearance and reproducibility. In response to this state of affairs, the recently completed Dialogic Evidence project was designed to explore the possibility (and the limits) of a productive co-existence between performance and documentation practices. In this paper I reflect on this project’s processes and outcomes, particular highlighting the potential of social web technologies as a collaborative means to archive, discuss and remember live performance.