حركات توده ای مواد، یک فرآیندهای ژئومورفیك طبیعی هستندكه بر اساس ویژگی های خاص این پدیده‎ها كه بخشی ا ز فرآیندهای محیطی یك محل اتفاق می افتند )گلید:2003 123).

 

فرسایش دامنه ای، سبب انتقال حجم زیادی از مواد دامنه ای، مانند سنگریزه ها،  واریزه ها و غیره به دره ها می شوند (لارسن و پاكز،:1997 836). در كشور ایران، به دلیل شرایط آب و هوایی، زمین شناسی و توپوگرافی مستعد، وقوع حركات توده ای، تلفات جانی و خسارتهای مالی و زیست محیطی قابل توجهی به همراه دارد، به طوری كه علاوه بر تخریب خاكهای حاصلخیز، موجب تهدید و تخریب سكونتگاه

 های انسانی و زیرساخت های بشری، قطع راههای ارتباطی و غیره می شوند. در نواحی مختلف كشور ایران چنانكه تا سال 1380 تعداد 3250 مورد ز مین لغزش به ثبت رسیده و تخمین زده می شود كه تعداد آنها بالغ بر دو برابر این رقم باشد (فیض نیا و همكاران، 1380.، 208 ) همچنین براساس گزارش كمیته كاهش بلایای طبیعی وزارت كشور، سهم خسارات سالانه ناشی از حركت های توده ای در ایران، میلیارد ریال برآورد گردیده است (احمدی و طالبی، 1380، . (324 : 500.

 

حركات دامنه ای پس از زلزله و سیل، بیشترین خسارات را به انسان وارد می­کند. به طوریکه سالانه میلیاردها تن خاک و سنگ بر اثر این پدیده جابه‎جا می­شود. در دهه­های اخیر، با توجه به سیر صعودی خسارات و زیانهای ناشی از حوادث طبیعی (به ویژه حركات دامنه ای)، مسئله پیش­بینی و ارائه راه­حل­ها و شیوه های کنترل و دور ماندن از ضررها و خسارات وارده، به طور جدی مطرح بوده است. در سال های اخیر میزان حركات دامنه ای مانند لغزش، ریزش و سولی فلوكسیون در حوضه‎ی آبریز ماسوله رودخان افزایش یافته است. همچنین در این مدت ماسوله رودخان نیز نسبت به سال های گذشته بیشتر سیلابی شده و حتی خسارات ناشی از آن در روستاهای واقع در اطرافش هم افزایش یافته است. از سوی دیگر طی این مدت فعالیت های انسانی هم مانند عملیات راهسازی جهت تعریض برخی نقاط حادثه خیز جاده، ایجاد معابر در دل جنگل جهت انتقال چوب درختان، بهره برداری بی رویه از جنگل و عدم كاشت نهال، برداشت بی‎رویه شن از كف رودخانه ایجاد تغییرات ژئومورفولوژیکی در برخی مناطق توسط افراد آن هم با اخذ مجوز از سازمان ها و نهادهای مربوطه در جهت ساخت استراحتگاه های گردشگری; افزایش یافته است. بر این اساس فعالیت های انسانی از یك سو و عدم برنامه ریزی و مدیریت صحیح در  راستای حفاظت از خاك این حوضه،  فرسایش و جابجایی خاك را سبب شده و انواع حركات دامنه ای را ایجاد كرده است. در این پایان نامه سعی می شودباتوجه به اینكه حركات دامنه ای حوضه ماسوله رودخان می تواند از عوامل گوناگونی مانند شرایط آب و هوایی، فعالیت های انسانی، میزان پوشش گیاهی، زمین ساخت حوضه،  فعالیت های تكتونیك و… نشات بگیرد علل دقیق این حركات دامنه درماسوله رودخان موردبررسی و نسبت به جلوگیری از حركات دامنه ای حوضه ماسوله رودخان پیشنهادهای ارائه شود.

متن کامل پایان نامه مقطع کارشناسی ارشد رشته : زبان انگلیسی

 

 

 

عنوان پایان نامه رشته زبان انگلیسی : تاثیر آموزش مقابله ای تلفظ بر مهارت شنیداری فراگیرندگان ایرانی زبان انگلیسی

 

 

دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی

 

واحد علوم و تحقیقات، گیلان

 

گروه زبان انگلیسی

 

پایان نامه برای دریافت درجه کارشناسی ارشد در رشته آموزش زبان انگلیسی

 

عنوان

 

تاثیر آموزش مقابله ای تلفظ بر مهارت شنیداری فراگیرندگان ایرانی زبان انگلیسی

 

استاد راهنما

 

دکتر شاهرخ جهاندار

 

شهریور1393  

 

برای رعایت حریم خصوصی نام نگارنده پایان نامه درج نمی شود

 

(در فایل دانلودی نام نویسنده موجود است)

 

تکه هایی از متن پایان نامه به عنوان نمونه :

 

(ممکن است هنگام انتقال از فایل اصلی به داخل سایت بعضی متون به هم بریزد یا بعضی نمادها و اشکال درج نشود ولی در فایل دانلودی همه چیز مرتب و کامل است)

 

Table of content

 

 

 

 

 

Title                                                                                                                     Page

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1	Abstract……………………………………………………………………………..…
3	Chapter 1: Introduction……………………………………………………………………
3	1.0. Introduction………………………………………………………………………
4	1.1. Theoretical Framework……………………………………………………………
6	1.2. Statement of the Problem…………………………………………………………
9	1.3. Significance of the Study…………………………………………………………
10	1.4. Purpose of the Study………………………………………………………………
11	1.5. Research Question of the Study…………………………………………………..
11	1.6. Hypotheses of the study…………………………………………………………..
11	1.7. Definitions of Key Terms…………………………………………………………
12	1.8. Summary………………………………………………………………………………..
16	Chapter 2: Literature Review………………………………………………………..
16	2.0. Introduction………………………………………………………………………
19	2.1. History of listening in ELT……………………………………………………….
23	2.2. Definition of listening by different researchers…………………………………
26	2.3. The importance of listening………………………………………………………
29	2.4. Why is listening difficult…………………………………………………………
32	2.5. How to develop listening…………………………………………………………
35	2.5.1. Bottom-up process in listening……………………………………………..
37	2.5.2. Top down process in listening …………………………………………….
39	2.5.3. Interactive processing in listening………………………………………….
40	2.6. Material for teaching listening……………………………………………………
42	2.7. Designing listening activity for the classroom……………………………………

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

44	2.8. Some obvious and latent problems in L2 listening comprehension………………
45	2.8.1. Fast Speech (Speed of Delivery)……………………………………………
45	2.8.2. Distortion of word boundaries………………………………………………
45	2.8.3.Weak form……………………………………………………………………
46	2.8.4. Elision……………………………………………………………………….
46	2.8.5. Assimilation…………………………………………………………………
47	2.8.6. Gemination…………………………………………………………………
47	2.8.7. Stress and Rhythm……………………………………………………………..
48	2.8.8. Intonation……………………………………………………………………
49	2.9. History of pronunciation in ELT…………………………………………………
53	2.10. Definition and importance of pronunciation……………………………………
54	2.11. Components of pronunciation…………………………………………………..
56	2.11.1. Segmental features of pronunciation………………………………………
58	2.11.2. Suprasegmental features of pronunciation………………………………..
61	2.12. Teaching pronunciation…………………………………………………………
65	2.13. Factors influencing pronunciation learning……………………………………..
65	2.13.1. The role of mother tongue…………………………………………………
66	2.13.2. Age factor………………………………………………………………….
67	2.13.3. Learners attitude and sense of identity……………………………………
68	2.13.4. Motivation…………………………………………………………………
68	2.13.5. Amount and type of prior pronunciation instruction………………………
69	2.14. Pronunciation and contrastive analysis………………………………………….
71	2.15. Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis………………………………………………..
73	2.16. Developing listening by teaching pronunciation………………………………..
74	2.17. Summary…………………………………………………………………………….
75	Chapter 3: Methodology…………………………………………………………….

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

75	3.0. Introduction………………………………………………………………………
75	3.1. The design of the study……………………………………………………………
76	3.2. Setting and Participants…………………………………………………………..
78	3.3. Instruments and Materials………………………………………………………..
79	3.4. Data collection procedures……………………………………………………….
83	3.5. Methods of Analyzing Data………………………………………………………
84	3.6. Summary………………………………………………………………………….
85	Chapter 4: Data Analysis……………………………………………………………
85	4.0. Introduction………………………………………………………………………
86	4.1. Data analysis and findings………………………………………………………..
90	4.2. Summary………………………………………………………………………….
92	Chapter 5: Discussion………………………………………………………………..
92	5.0. Introduction………………………………………………………………………
93	5.1. General discussion………………………………………………………………..
93	5.1.1. The experimental group…………………………………………………….
94	5.1.2.The control group……………………………………………………………
95	5.1.3. Difference between the developments of both groups……………………..
97	5.2. Pedagogical Implications…………………………………………………………
99	5.3. Limitations of the study…………………………………………………………..
100	5.4. Suggestion for further research……………………………………………………
100	5.5. Summary………………………………………………………………………….
101	REFERENCE……………………………………………………………………………….
115	Appendix………………………………………………………………………………
116	Appendix A: OPT Test………………………………………………………………..
123	Appendix B: Pre/ Post Tests…………………………………………………………..
132	Appendix C: Treatment……………………………………………………………….

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LIST OF TABLES

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 4-1.The correlation coefficient between the random variables of listening comprehension ability (pre-test) and the independent variables…….	87
Table 4-2: Statistical characteristics of the dependent variable (post-test) of listening comprehension ability in the control and experimental groups…..	88
Table 4-3: Paired T-test to compare the mean difference between pre-test and post-test experimental and control groups…………………………………….	88
Table 4-4: Mean and the rounded mean of listening comprehension ability dependent variable…………………………………………………………….	89
Table 4-5: The correlation coefficient of listening comprehension ability with removing mutual effect in the experimental and control groups………………	89

  

 

 

 

LIST OF FIGURES

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

56	Figure1. Features of Pronunciation…………………………………………………
57	Figure2. English Phonemic Chart………………………………………………….
73	Figure3. Three versions of Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis………………………
76	Figure4. Schematic representation of the design…………………………………..
77	Figure5. Participants of the study…………………………………………………..
81	Figure6. Overly of Persian consonants on the English Inventory………………….
81	Figure7. English and Persian vowels………………………………………………
82	Figure8. Errors and problems by EFL learners…………………………………….
83	Figure9. Data Collection Procedures………………………………………………
87	Figure 10: Listening comprehension ability of control and experimental groups
90	Figure 11: The post-test means of paragraph writing ability in the experimental and control groups………………………………………………………………….

 

 

 

 

 

 

Abstract

 

The present study has made an attempt to investigate the impact of contrastive-based pronunciation teaching on listening comprehension ability of Iranian EFL learners. Based on it, this study set out to focus on the phonological feature (segmental feature) and the pronunciation errors which are made by Iranian learners of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) and the impact of such transfers and errors on their listening comprehension ability. To achieve this purpose, the researcher conducted an OPT test (Oxford Placement Test) to homogenize students. Then 40 female EFL learners attending general English course at Iran Language Institute (ILI) in Rasht, Iran whose score fell between 1SD±Mean were chosen to conduct the study. The participants were divided into experimental and control group.

 

Before starting the training, a pretest was applied to all students, and the treatment started the week after. Unlike the control group, the participants in the experimental one received special treatment. They were trained by contrastive teaching most frequent errors for Iranian EFL learners. The treatment lasted for 30 minutes class hours; one class hour – 90 minutes – a week for four weeks. By the end of the forth week, a post-test of listening was conducted and the results were analyzed through Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS). To do the results quantitative data have been analyzed through descriptive statistical methods (mean and standard deviation), and the researcher ran inferential statistics (t-test) and analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). The results showed significant difference between the control and experimental group. It was, therefore, concluded that using contrastive-based pronunciation teaching can improve the listening comprehension ability of EFL learners.

 

This study gives the curriculum designers, administrators, teachers and material developers the opportunity to draw on the findings to shape curricula, create syllabi, develop materials, and conduct classes accordingly.

 

 

 

KEY WORDS: CONTRASTIVE ANALYSIS, PRONUNCIATION, LISTENING COMPREHENSION, EFL

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter1. Introduction

 

 

 

 

 

1.0. Introduction

 

Listening is one of the most problematic skills for foreign language learners (FLL) since it does not develop easily and plays an important role in communication as it is said that, of the total time spent on communication, it takes up 40-50% (Mendelsohn, 1994). In the early period of ELT this skill was not regarded as an important skill in communication but gradually, during the years of developing ELT field, listening comprehension (LC) has received the emphasis it always deserved. Second language educators now acknowledge it as a crucial in FLL and encourage language teachers to devote more class time to listening activities. So the importance of listening comprehension in language learning and language teaching has moved from the status of incidental and peripheral importance to a status of significance and central importance (Celce-Murcia, 1991).

 

To develop this skill many different methods have been applied and various activities have been employed in classrooms. Many courses now offer ways and many books and conferences claim to teach teachers how to improve their students’ performance in listening comprehension. Furthermore, many teaching techniques in this regard have been introduced. For example, Rost (1991) has suggested more than 30 activities with many variations. In addition to strategies, teachers and researchers try to use different techniques such as using visual aids and particular computer program. The use of these techniques depends highly on student’s learning capacity and also availability of suitable materials. With the help of technology, opportunities for classroom instruction arise and teachers try to take advantage of these opportunities.

 

Nevertheless, listening has remained one of the most difficult skills due to certain reasons. For instance, the materials use in class lack the strength to cover how the real listening process occurs (Brown & Yule, 1983; Rosa, 2002). Because the materials include reduced speech and usually modified according to the level of the FLLs. This causes they have problem in real life communication and have problem in comprehending ‘ real speech’. Chastain (1988) asserts that the ability to comprehend the spoken second language plays an essential role in second language learning and use.

 

One of the techniques for improving listening comprehension is pronunciation awareness and finding the nature of it on the learner’s language. In order to apprehend what is meant thoroughly, one has to be aware of the nature of spoken language which is directly related to the phonological features of the language and the absence of elements in their own language that causes the misunderstanding of spoken language and results in comprehension decline. Therefore, for FLLs contrastive based pronunciation teaching deserves consideration. With respect to this assumption, this study attempts to find if contrastive-based pronunciation teaching has any effect on developing listening comprehension.

 

1.1. Theoretical Framework

 

Before linguistics became a scientific study of language, language was studied subjectively. This subjectivity lied in

 the fact that language investigators, by the end of the nineteenth century and the beginning of the twentieth century, had been prescriptive in their ideas- to say how a language or a teaching method should be or should be taught, how we ought to speak and how we ought not to speak- rather than to be descriptive- to describe what really existed, and focuses on describing how native speakers actually do speak. Perspective approach codifies certain distinctions between standard and non-standard varieties, and often makes covert value judgments by referring to standard varieties as correct or ‘good’ English and the non-standard as incorrect or ‘bad’ English. While in contrast, descriptive view aims to describe language as it is actually use. The rules are more like a blueprint for building well-formed structures, and they represent speaker’s unconscious knowledge, or ‘mental grammar’ of the language (Norbert Schmitt, 2002). The real acceleration of change in linguistic description and pedagogy occurred during the twentieth century, in which a number of movements influenced the field only to be replaced or modified by subsequent developments.

 

Early in the 20th century, understanding literary works was the sole purpose of English Language Learning (ELL). Researchers and teachers focus primarily on reading and grammatical skills (Richards & Rodgers, 2001) and listening was not regarded as an important component of language teaching. Breeding a fluctuation in the attention given to listening started by changes in approaches to language teaching which led to changes in classroom applications. Listening became increasingly integrated into English teaching curricula in the 1970s, and has preserved its place until today (Cinemre, 1991). Now, there is a considerable number of researchers and scholars who give paramount importance to the skill (e.g., Berne, 2004; Brown, 2008; Jia & Fu, 2011). Lundsteen (1979) states that   listening is the basis for other skills, is true for second language (L2) as well as first language (L1) acquisition. Learners need to listen to language input. Without this they cannot produce in other language skill areas which lead to no learning (Rost, 1994). Therefore, the importance of teaching listening can well be seen. For being a complex phenomenon, teaching listening has caught the attention of many researchers (e.g., Brown, 2008; Hayati & Mohmedi, 2011; Hinkel, 2006; Vandergrift, 2007) and teachers in pursuit of finding ways for classroom instruction.

 

Applying strategies has become mounting concern for both teachers and learners. However, using these strategies alone will not help neither learners to develop their listening nor teachers who attempt to use varies techniques in their classes. Lundsteen (1979) defines listening as the process in which spoken language changes into meaning in the mind.  To convert spoken foreign language in the mind, learners should be aware of the phonological features of the language. This fact signals the importance of the pronunciation component of language learning. As part of successful communication, pronunciation teaching has become important (Celce-Murcia, Brinton, & Goodwin, 1996). With the rise of the communicative approach in language teaching, increasing need of teaching pronunciation has triggered researchers to work on various components of pronunciation. One which is the subject of this study is the absence of the elements in the learner’s language and contrastive teaching of them on listening comprehension. The literature suggests that pronunciation cannot be dissociated from other foreign language skills (e.g., Celce-Murcia, Brinton, & Goodwin, 1996); in fact it has a significant relation to listening comprehension. Therefore, teaching these interrelated skills together in classrooms so as to develop both may be encouraged.

 

1.2. Statement of the problem

 

Listening is one of the most challenging skills for EFL learners to develop as it is probably the least explicit of the four language skills (Vandergrift, 2004). It is a key to all effective communications, without effective listening ability, messages are easily misunderstood- communication breaks down and the sender of the message can easily become frustrated and irritated. In the field of English Language Teaching, listening has been neglected as language skill, or practiced in inadequate ways. Students often find a tremendous amount of difficulties while they are listening to the language they are learning (Sevil Ak, 2012). They are disappointed by the inability to comprehend recorded dialogues, or songs, even if the elements of stress and intonation are slowly enunciated. The time an individual is engaged in communication is devoted approximately 9 per cent to writing, 16 percent to reading, 30 per cent to speaking, and 45 per cent to listening (Rivers and Temperley 1978; Oxford 1993; Celce-Murica 1995). So, despite of the importance of this skill, it is one of the most problematic areas for foreign language learners and plays an important role in language learning.

 

To develop this skill, different methods and activities have been applied. Teachers use pre listening activities like free discussion on the topic by the use of included words, or writing new or unfamiliar words on board, or other activities based on the learners’ level and amount of knowledge. Nevertheless, listening has remained one of the most difficult skills due to certain reasons and should be given more attention (Rivers 1968; Widdowson 1978; Mc Carty 1991, Long 1985; Ur .1984). Listener may listen to the appropriate tape recording based on their level or they may be helped by the teacher to understand better. Although they may comprehend what has been said on tape recording, they have problem in real life communication when they miss some important details (Brown, G., 1977; Brown, J.D, 2006; Brown &Yule, 1983). Students are exposed to reduced language in the classroom and this causes they have problem in real speech (Rosa, 2002).

:

 

تحقیق حاضر، چهار کتاب متداول آموزش زبان انگلیسی در موسسات زبان انگلیسی ایران ( انگلیش ریزالت، توتال انگلیش، تاپ ناچ و اینترچنج ) را از دیدگاه مدرسان و زبان آموزان ارزیابی و مقایسه نموده است. 366 زبان آموز و 76 مدرس زبان انگلیسی که به طور تصادفی از موسسات زبان استان های گیلان و مازندران انتخاب شده بودند، در این تحقیق مشارکت نمودند. 212 نفر از زبان آموزان و 35 نفر از مدرسان را مردان و 154 نفر از زبان آموزان و 41 نفر از مدرسان را زنان تشکیل می دادند. بازه تجربه تدریس کتاب مورد نظر توسط مدرسان بین دو تا شش سال و بازه تجربه استفاده زبان آموزان از کتاب مورد نظر بین یک تا سه سال بوده است.  جمع آوری داده ها به وسیله پرسشنامه کانینگ ورث (1995) که اصلاحاتی در آن انجام شد و همچنین به وسیله مصاحبه با 25 درصد زبان آموزان و 10 درصد مدرسان شرکت کننده در این تحقیق انجام گردید. تجزیه و تحلیل اطلاعات نشان داد که نقاط قوت کتاب اینترچنج از دیدگاه مدرسان، محتوا و فرهنگ و از دیدگاه زبان آموزان، جلوه های بصری بوده است. بعلاوه، عدم توجه کافی به مهارت های مطالعه و محتوای آموزشی پشتیبان از دیدگاه مدرسان و عدم توجه کافی به آموزش واژگان، مهارت های زبانی، شیوه های آموزش، مهارت های مطالعه، آزمون و تمرین، به عنوان نقاط ضعف از دیدگاه زبان آموزان محسوب گردید. در مورد کتاب انگلیش ریزالت، نقاط قوت از دیدگاه مدرسان شامل شیوه های آموزش، جلوه های بصری و فرهنگ و از دیدگاه زبان آموزان شامل دستور و جلوه های بصری بوده است. علاوه بر این نقاط ضعف کتاب از دیدگاه مدرسان و زبان آموزان، عدم توجه کافی به آموزش واژگان و آموزش تلفظ بوده است. در رابطه با کتاب تاپ ناچ مدرسان اعتقاد داشتند که نقاط قوت کتاب، دستور، جلوه های بصری، محتوای آموزشی پشتیبان و فرهنگ و از دیدگاه زبان آموزان محتوا، دستور، آموزش تلفظ و جلوه های بصری بوده است. در مورد کتاب توتال انگلیش، بخش فرهنگ از دیدگاه مدرسان و جلوه های بصری، آزمون و تمرین از دیدگاه زبان آموزان به عنوان نقاط قوت شناخته شد. در حالیکه تنها نقطه ضعف این کتاب از دیدگاه زبان آموزان عدم توجه کافی به آموزش تلفظ بوده است.

 

واژگان کلیدی: کتاب آموزش زبان، پرسشنامه، ارزیابی محتوای آموزشی، زبان انگلیسی به عنوان زبان خارجی

 

 

 

Table of contents

 

Abstract. 1

 

Chapter one: Introduction.. 2

 

1.0 Preliminaries. 2

 

1.1 Statement of the problem.. 4

 

1.2 Significance of the Study. 6

 

1.3 Objectives of the study. 7

 

1.4 Research Questions/Hypotheses. 7

 

1.5 Definition of Key Terms. 8

 

1.5.1 Coursebook. 8

 

1.5.2 Evaluation. 8

 

1.5.3 Material Evaluation. 8

 

1.5.4 Checklist 9

 

1.6Outline of the Study. 9

 

Chapter two:Literature review… 10

 

2.0 Preliminaries. 10

 

2.1 The role of textbooks in English language teaching. 10

 

2.2 Evaluating ELT Coursebooks. 13

 

2.3 Criteria for coursebook evaluation. 17

 

2.3.1 Checklists. 22

 

2.4 Studies on coursebook evaluation. 24

 

Chapter three:Methodology.. 36

 

3.0 Preliminaries. 36

 

3.1 Participants. 36

 

3.2Instruments and Materials. 36

 

3.2.1 Checklist 37

 

3.2.1.1 Pilot study. 38

 

3.2.2 Interchange. 38

 

3.2.3 Top Notch. 39

 

3.2.4 English Result 40

 

3.2.5 Total English. 40

 

3.3 Data collection procedure. 40

 

3.4 Data Analysis. 41

 

Chapter four:Results. 42

 

4.0 Preliminaries. 42

 

4.1 Data Analysis and Findings. 42

 

4.1.1 Analysis of the Questionnaires. 43

 

4.1.1.1 Content from Teachers’ Perspective. 43

 

4.1.1.2 Content from Students’ Perspective. 51

 

4.1.1.3 Grammar from Teachers’ Perspective. 60

 

4.1.1.4 Grammar from Students’ Perspective. 66

 

4.1.1.5 Vocabulary from Teachers’ Perspective. 72

 

4.1.1.6 Vocabulary from Students’ Perspective. 76

 

4.1.1.7 Phonology from Teachers’ Perspective. 80

 

4.1.1.8 Phonology from Students’ Perspective. 84

 

4.1.1.9 Language Skills from Teachers’ Perspective. 88

 

4.1.1.10 Language Skills from Students’ Perspective. 93

 

4.1.1.11 Methodology from Teachers’ Perspective. 99

 

4.1.1.12 Methodology from Students’ Perspective. 104

 

4.1.1.13 Study Skills from Teachers’ Perspective. 110

 

4.1.1.14 Study Skills from Students’ Perspective. 116

 

4.1.1.15 Visuals from Teachers’ Perspective. 124

 

4.1.1.16 Visuals from Students’ Perspective. 129

 

4.1.1.17 Practice and Testing from Teachers’ Perspective. 134

 

4.1.1.18 Practice and Testing from Students’ Perspective. 140

 

4.1.1.19 Supplementary Material from Teachers’ Perspective. 146

 

4.1.1.20 Objectives from Teachers’ Perspective. 150

 

4.1.1.21 Content Selection from Teachers’ Perspective. 156

 

4.1.1.22 Gradation from Teachers’ Perspective. 160

 

4.1.1.23 Culture from Teachers’ Perspective. 163

 

4.1.2 Analysis of the Interviews. 178

 

Chapter five:Discussion.. 181

 

5.0 Preliminaries. 181

 

5.1 General Discussion. 181

 

5.1.1 Research Question 1. 181

 

5.1.2 Research Question 2. 186

 

5.1.2.1 Strengths of Interchange from Students’ Perspective. 187

 

5.1.2.2 Weaknesses of Interchange from Students’ Perspective. 187

 

5.1.2.3 Strengths of Interchange from Teachers’ Perspective. 188

 

5.1.2.4 Weaknesses of Interchange from Teachers’ Perspective. 189

 

5.1.2.5 Strengths of English Result from Students’ Perspective. 189

 

5.1.2.6 Weaknesses of English Result from Students’ Perspective. 190

 

5.1.2.7 Strengths of English Result from Teachers’ Perspective. 190

 

5.1.2.8 Weaknesses of English Result from Teachers’ Perspective. 190

 

5.1.2.9 Strengths of Top Notch from Students’ Perspective. 191

 

5.1.2.10 Strengths of Top Notch from Teachers’ Perspective. 192

 

5.1.2.11 Strengths of Total English from Students’ Perspective. 192

 

5.1.2.12 Weaknesses of Total English from Students’ Perspective. 193

 

5.1.2.13 Strengths of Total English from Teachers’ Perspective. 193

 

5.2 Implications of the Study. 193

 

5.3 Limitations of the Study. 194

 

5.4 Suggestions for Further Research. 194

 

5.5 Summery. 195

 

Reference. 196

 

Appendices 203

 

Appendix A.. 203

 

Appendix B.. 209

 

 

 

List of Tables

 

Table                                                                                                                                 Page

 

4.1       Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to content in the case of Interchange coursebook………….……..43

 

4.2       Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to content in the case of English Result coursebook………………45

 

4.3       Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to content in the case of Top Notch coursebook…………………47

 

4.4       Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to content in the case of Total English coursebook………………49

 

4.5       Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the students’ responses related to content in the case of   Interchange coursebook………………51

 

4.6       Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the students’ responses related to content in the case of   English Result coursebook……………53

 

4.7       Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the students’ responses related to content in the case of Top Notch coursebook…………………56

 

4.8       Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the students’ responses related to content in the case of Total English coursebook………….…..58

 

4.9       Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to grammar in the case of Interchange coursebook………………60

 

4.10    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to grammar in the case of English Result coursebook..……….…62

 

4-11    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to grammar in the case of Top Notch coursebook………………..60

 

4.12    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to grammar in the case of Total English coursebook……………65

 

4.13    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the students’ responses related to grammar in the case of Interchange coursebook……….…….66

 

4.14    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the students’ responses related to grammar in the case of English Result coursebook………….68

 

4.15    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the students’ responses related to grammar in the case of Top Notch coursebook………………69

 

4.16    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the students’ responses related to grammar in the case of Total English coursebook…………….71

 

4.17    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to vocabulary in the case of Interchange coursebook………..…..72

 

4.18    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to vocabulary in the case of English Result coursebook……..….73

 

4.19    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to vocabulary in the case of Top Notch coursebook………….…74

 

4.20    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to vocabulary in the case of Total English coursebook……..…..75

 

4.21    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the students’ responses related to vocabulary in the case of Interchange coursebook……….…..76

 

4.22    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the students’ responses related to vocabulary in the case of English Result coursebook………..77

 

4.23    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the students’ responses related to vocabulary in the case of Top Notch coursebook……….…..78

 

4.24    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the students’ responses related to vocabulary in the case of Total English coursebook…………79

 

4.25    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to phonology in the case of Interchange coursebook………..…80

 

4.26    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to phonology in the case of English Result coursebook……….81

 

4.27    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to phonology in the case of Top Notch coursebook……………82

 

4.28    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to phonology in the case of Total English coursebook…………83

 

4.29    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the students’ responses related to phonology in the case of Interchange coursebook……………84

 

4.30    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the students’ responses related to phonology in the case of   English Result coursebook……….85

 

4.31    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the students’ responses related to phonology in the case of   Top Notch coursebook…………..86

 

4.32    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the students’ responses related to phonology in the case of Total English coursebook…………87

 

4.33    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to language skills in the case of Interchange coursebook……….88

 

4.34    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to language skills in the case of English Result coursebook…….89

 

4.35    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to language skills in the case of Top Notch coursebook…….….90

 

4.36    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to language skills in the case of Total English coursebook.……92

 

4.37    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the students’ responses related to language skills in the case of Interchange coursebook………93

 

4.38    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the students’ responses related to language skills in the case of English Result coursebook..….95

 

4.39    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the students’ responses related to language skills in the case of Top Notch coursebook …..….96

 

4.40    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the students’ responses related to language skills in the case of Total English coursebook..…..98

 

4.41    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to methodology in the case of Interchange coursebook………..99

 

4.42    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to methodology in the case of English Result coursebook..……100

 

4.43    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to methodology in the case of Top Notch coursebook………….101

 

4.44    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to methodology in the case of Total English coursebook…..…..103

 

4.45    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the students’ responses related to methodology in the case of Interchange coursebook………..104

 

4.46    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the students’ responses related to methodology in the case of English Result coursebook…….105

 

4.47    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the students’ responses related to methodology in the case of Top Notch coursebook…………107

 

4.48    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the students’ responses related to methodology in the case of Total English coursebook……….108

 

4.49    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to study skills in the case of Interchange coursebook…………..110

 

4.50    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to study skills in the case of English Result coursebook……….112

 

4.51    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to study skills in the case of Top Notch coursebook……………113

 

4.52    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to study skills in the case of Total English coursebook………..115

 

4.53    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the students’ responses related to study skills in the case of Interchange coursebook …………116

 

4.54    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the students’ responses related to study skills in the case of English Result coursebook……….118

 

4.55    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the students’ responses related to study skills in the case of Top Notch coursebook……..…….120

 

4.56    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the students’ responses related to study skills in the case of Total English coursebook………..122

 

4.57    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to visuals in the case of Interchange coursebook….……………124

 

4.58    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to visuals in the case of English Result coursebook..………….125

 

4.59    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to visuals in the case of Top Notch coursebook……………….126

 

4.60    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to visuals in the case of Total English coursebook…………….128

 

4.61    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the students’ responses related to visuals in the case of Interchange coursebook…………..….129

 

4.62    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the students’ responses related to visuals in the case of English Result coursebook………..…130

 

4.63    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the students’ responses related to visuals in the case of Top Notch coursebook………………131

 

4.64    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the students’ responses related to visuals in the case of Total English coursebook…………….…133

 

4.65    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to practice and testing in the case of Interchange coursebook……134

 

4.66    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to practice and testing in the case of English Result coursebook…136

 

4.67    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to practice and testing in the case of Top Notch coursebook…….137

 

4.68    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to practice and testing in the case of Total English coursebook….139

 

4.69    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the students’ responses related to practice and testing in the case of Interchange coursebook……140

 

4.70    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the students’ responses related to practice and testing in the case of English Result coursebook..142

 

4.71    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the students’ responses related to practice and testing in the case of Top Notch coursebook..…..143

 

4.72    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the students’ responses related to practice and testing in the case of Total English coursebook…144

 

4.73    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to supplementary material in the case of Interchange coursebook.146

 

4.74    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to supplementary material in the case of English Result coursebook…………………………………………………………………………..147

 

4.75    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to supplementary material in the case of Top Notch coursebook..148

 

4.76    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to supplementary material in the case of  Total English coursebook…………………………………………………………………………..149

 

4.77    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to objectives in the case of Interchange coursebook……………..150

 

4.78    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to objectives in the case of English Result coursebook…….……151

 

4.79    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to objectives in the case of Top Notch coursebook……………..153

 

4.80    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to objectives in the case of Total English coursebook……….…154

 

4.81    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to content selection in the case of Interchange coursebook….…156

 

4.82    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to content selection in the case of English Result coursebook….157

 

4.83    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to content selection in the case of  Top Notch coursebook….…158

 

4.84    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to content selection in the case of Total English coursebook.…159

 

4.85    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to gradation in the case of Interchange coursebook……………160

 

4.86    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to gradation in the case of English Result coursebook…..…….161

 

4.87    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to gradation in the case of Top Notch coursebook…………….161

 

4.88    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to gradation in the case of Total English coursebook……..…..162

 

4.89    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to culture in the case of Interchange coursebook………..…….163

 

4.90    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to culture in the case of English Result coursebook…..……. 167

 

4.91    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to culture in the case of Top Notch coursebook………………171

 

4.92    Result of the descriptive statistics, percentage and Chi-square of the teachers’ responses related to culture in the case of  Total English coursebook…………..175

 

Abstract

 

The present study sought to evaluate and compare four popular English coursebooks (English Result, Total English, Top Notch and Interchange series) used in Iran’s language institutes from teachers’ and students’ point of view. Three-hundred and sixty-six students and 76 teachers, who were selected randomly from the language institutes of Guilan and Mazandaran provinces, participated in this study. Two-hundred and twelve of the students and 35 of the teachers were male and 154 of the students and 41 of the teachers were female. The range of teachers’

 experience of teaching the coursebook was between 2-6 years and the range of students’ experience of studying the coursebook was between 1-3 years. Data were gathered through modified version of Cunningsworth’s (1995) checklist as well as interviews with 25 percent of the teachers and 10 percent of the students. Data analysis indicated that the strengths of Interchange from the teachers’ perspective are content and culture categories and from the students’ point of view are visuals. In addition, the coursebook’s weaknesses from the teachers’ perspective are reported to be insufficient study skills and supplementary materials and from the students’ point of view are lack of due attention to vocabulary, language skills, methodology, study skills, and practice and testing. In the case of English Result, the strengths from teachers’ perspective are methodology, visuals and culture and from students’ view are grammar and visuals. Moreover, the coursebook’s weaknesses from both teachers’ and students’ perspectives are reported to be lack of due attention to vocabulary and phonology. Regarding Top Notch, teachers believed that the strengths of the coursebook are grammar, visuals, supplementary materials and culture categories and from students’ point of view are content, grammar, phonology and visuals categories. In terms of Total English, culture is considered the strength of the coursebook from teachers’ perspective and visuals as well as practice and testing from students’ point of view. Moreover, from students’ perspective, the primary shortcoming of the coursebook is considered to be phonology. The findings have several implications for language teachers, students, and syllabus designers.

 

Key words:   Coursebook, checklist, evaluation, EFL

 

 

 

Chapter One:

 

Introduction

 

 

 

1.0 Introduction

 

In the process of language teaching and learning, several components are involved in such as the learners, the teachers, the environment in which the learning event is taking place, the purpose of learning, and more importantly the textbooks since they undoubtedly specify the main part of the teaching in the classroom and out-of-class learning of the students. Hutchinson and Torres (1994) state no teaching-learning situation is complete without adopting its appropriate textbook. Materials and textbooks serve as one of the main instruments for shaping knowledge, attitudes, and principles of the students (Nooreen & Arshad, 2010).

 

Today, coursebooks are of vital significance to educational practices all over the world since they serveas the means of transferring knowledge between teachers and students. In addition, they are considered as the basis formuch ofthe language input and the language practice which learners receive in the classroom. As Richards (2001) states, for learners the textbook might provide the main source of contact they maintain with the language.  Litz (2005) asserts that whether one believes textbooks are too inflexible and biased to be used directly as instructional material, there can be no denying that they are still the most valuable element in educational systems. Garinger (2002) believes that a textbook can serve different purposes for teachers: as a core resource, as a source of supplemental material, as an inspiration for classroom activities, even as the curriculum itself.

 

Various authors have given various merits of textbooks. In spite of their various limitations, textbooks are very useful tools in the hand of a teacher. Richards (2001, pp. 1-2) lists the following principal advantages of using textbooks:

 

• They provide structure and syllabus for a program.

 

• They help standardize instruction.

 

• They maintain quality.

 

• They provide a variety of learning resources.

 

• They are efficient.

 

• They can provide effective language models and input.

 

• They can train teachers.

 

• They are visually appealing.

A relatively new trend in the field of English language teaching (ELT), coursebook evaluation has attracted many language scholars’ and curriculum developers’ attention. Coursebooks have to be evaluated, since they are the basic materials in the learning process. The aim of textbook evaluation was to develop checklists based on which a book could be analyzed in detail in order to assure its usefulness and practicality with such factors as proficiency level of students, learners’ needs, course objectives, gender, and many other contextual factors. (Najafi Sarem, Hamidi, & Mahmoudie, 2013)

متن کامل پایان نامه مقطع کارشناسی ارشد رشته : زبان انگلیسی

 

 

 

عنوان پایان نامه رشته زبان انگلیسی: A Bakhtinian Reading of Donald Barthelme’s Snow White

 

 

 

Islamic Azad University–Central Tehran Branch

 

Department of Postgraduate Studies

 

 

 

Title:

 

 

 

A Bakhtinian Reading of Donald Barthelme’s Snow White

 

 

 

A Thesis Submitted to the Department of Postgraduate Studies as a Partial Fulfillment for the Degree of MA in English Literature

 

Supervisor:

 

Dr. Alireza Anushirvani

 

 

 

Examiners:

 

Dr. Kian Soheil

 

Dr. Razieh Eslamieh

 

 

 

Summer 2014

 

برای رعایت حریم خصوصی نام نگارنده پایان نامه درج نمی شود

 

(در فایل دانلودی نام نویسنده موجود است)

 

تکه هایی از متن پایان نامه به عنوان نمونه :

 

(ممکن است هنگام انتقال از فایل اصلی به داخل سایت بعضی متون به هم بریزد یا بعضی نمادها و اشکال درج نشود ولی در فایل دانلودی همه چیز مرتب و کامل است)

 

Abstract:

 

The present dissertation seeks to critically investigatethe multiplicity of voices in Donald Barthelme’s Snow White according to Bakhtin’s premises of polyphony and dialogism. In Bakhtinian point of view, literary discourse is polyphonic, a combination of multiple voices of equal authority. This is defined in terms of his own concept of dialogism, the explicit or implicit dialogue of differently situated voices. As a result, there is a close relation between the two notions to the degree that polyphony is considered as a characteristic of dialogism. This is suggested by Donald Barthelme in his comic parable of Snow White (1967), in which the diversity of discourses, expressed through the dialogues, paves the way for polyphonic enterprise. Although the story is told from the first person point of view, almost the entire novel is conceived through dialogues, which the characters are engaged in both with themselves and other characters. This leads the various discourses to be heard equally. Investigating these discourses and the ideologies they represent through the polyphonic voices expressed in dialogic activities provides the backboneof the present dissertation.

 

 

 

Key Words: Polyphony, Discourse,Voice, Dialogue, Bakhtin

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table of Contents:

 

 

 

Dedication. i

 

Acknowledgement: ii

 

Abstract iii

 

Table of Contents. iv

 

 

 

CHAPTER ONE

 

INTRODUCTION.. 1

 

1.1. General Overview.. 1

 

1.2. Statement of the Problem.. 6

 

1.3. Objectives and Significance of the Study. 9

 

1.3.1. Significance of the Study. 9

 

1.3.2. Purpose of the Study. 9

 

1.3.3. Research Questions. 10

 

1.4. Review of literature. 10

 

1.5. Materials and Methodology. 18

 

1.5.1. Definition of Key Terms. 18

 

1.6. Organization of the Study. 21

 

 

 

CHAPTER TWO

 

BAKHTIN; WORKS and IDEAS. 23

 

2.1. Toward a Philosophy of the Act 24

 

2.1.1. Self and other 25

 

2.2. Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics. 27

 

2.2.1. Polyphony. 28

 

2.3. Carnival in Dostoevsky and Rabelais. 33

 

2.4. The Dialogic Imagination. 40

 

2.4.1. Dialogism.. 41

 

2.4.2. Heteroglossia. 44

 

2.4.3. Hybridization. 48

 

2.4.4. Chronotope. 50

 

 

 

CHAPTER THREE

 

3.1. Barthelme’s Art of Story-Telling. 53

 

3.1.2. Barthelme and Postmodernism.. 57

 

3.1.3. Disregard of Conventionality. 59

 

3.2. Why Bakhtin?. 72

 

 

 

CHAPTER FOUR

 

SNOW WHITE; A DIALOGIC CONSTRUCT. 78

 

4.1. Barthelme’s Dialogic Enterprise. 80

 

4.1.1. Artistic Representation of Language. 80

 

4.1.2. Multiplicity of Voices. 84

 

4.1.3. Multiplicity of Discourses. 86

 

4.1.4. Multiplicity of Documents. 92

 

4.1.5. Other Dialogic Techniques. 100

 

4.1.6. The Carnivalesque. 104

 

 

 

CHAPTER FIVE

 

CONCLUSION.. 109

 

5.1. Summing Up. 109

 

5.2. Findings. 118

 

5.3. Suggestions for Further Research. 120

 

 

 

Bibliography. 124

 

 

 

 

 

CHAPTER ONE

 

INTRODUCTION

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1.1. General Overview

 

Donald Barthelme, an American author, novelist, editor, journalist and professorwas born in Philadelphia in 1931, deep in the deep Depression. He spent much of his early career in journalism till a Guggenheim Fellowship in 1967 paved the way for his first novel, Snow White (1967). Soon after, he was considered one of the masters of post-war fiction working outside the realistic tradition to satirize American life. He continued teaching and writing fictions until his death in 1989.

 

Although Barthelme isnever known as a science-fiction writer, he has created works which are included in the Avant-Garde of cyberpunk. His world combines Samuel Beckett’s nihilism with the ecstasy of Richard Bratigan’s surrealism. Nothing is absolutely true or false in his stories. He is a philosophical author who combines existentialism with post-modernism. He does not explicitly admit his debt to these schools in the themes and contexts of his works. However, his innovative and organic style reveals his close relation to Barth, Sartre, Foucault and Derrida.

 

Many critics have not appreciated Barthelme’s writing due to its rejection of traditional forms and its unusual nature. Others have dubbed it extremely modern and individualistic. Come Back, Dr.Caligari, the collection of his early stories published in 1964, is acclaimed as an innovation in short story form in which he has continued his success with Unspeakable Practices, Unnatural acts (1968). Later on, Barthelmecontinued to write over a hundred more short stories many of which are revised and reprinted in Sixty Stories (1981), Forty Stories (1987) and, posthumously, Flying to America (2007). As a huge success, Sixty Storiesbrought him a PEN/Faulkner Award for fiction. He also won a National Book Award in 1972 for his children’s book, The Slightly Irregular Fire Engine; or, the Hithering Thithering Djinn. Additionally, he has produced four novels in his typical fragmentary style: Snow White (1967), The Dead Father (1975), Paradise (1986), and The King (1990, posthumous).

 

Barthelme’s style and thought are products of twentieth century torment. The observation of absurdity lurking beneath the surface of most conventional customs becomesthe fuel for his creative fire. He is not only praised as disciplined but also judged as meaningless. His fragmented verbal collage surrounded in constant skepticism and irony has introduced him as a postmodernist writer. Furthermore, this fragmentation partly shapes his formal originality as the narrator in “See the Moon?” states: “Fragments are the only forms I trust”(Barthelme, UnspeakablePractices,UnnaturalActs 160). Joyce Carol Oates also comments on the same notion: “This from a writer of arguable genius whose works reflect what he himself must feel, in book after book, that his brain is all fragments . . . just like everything else” (63).

 

Barthelme’s first novel, Snow White, is a parody based upon both Grimm’s fairytale of Snow White and Disney’s version of the story. It displays both his avoidance of the formalism of his predecessors and his innovation in voice and style. Familiar characters of childhood have been taken away to be replaced with psychologically complex paradigms of postmodernist satire. Moreover, Barthelme’s clear-cut exploration of grotesque highlighted with an extraordinary humor encounters us with the irrational world of everyday life.

 

 

Barthelme brings the fairytale story up to date. Snow White lives with Kevin, Edward, Hubert, Henry, Clem and Dan, whooccupy themselves by washing the buildings and tending the vats where they make Chinese baby food. However, they are challenged by various problems to the point that even the President is worried about them. Bill, the leader of the men, is withdrawn as his ambitions would not come true. Eventually, he is judged to be guilty and punished to death by hanging primarily because of the sin of vatricide. On the other hand, Snow White awaits a prince and takes Paul, the artist as the prince figure. Jane, whose lover is Hogo de bergerac, is the wicked stepmother figure. Hogo falls for Snow White and Jane prepares a poisoned Gibson to kill her. But, Paul drinks the beverageinstead and dies. Snow White mourns Paul, though there’s nothing in it for her. Dan, the practical man is the new leader and the heroes depart in search of a new principle: Heigh-ho.

 

Mikhail Mikhailovich Bakhtin (1895-1975), although achieving fame posthumously, has been considered one of the most influential theorists of the twentieth century. From 1960s in which Bakhtin was introduced to the West, his writings on a variety of subjects have inspired works in a number of various traditions. His influence has grown enormously not only in literary criticism but also in disciplines as diverse as history, anthropology, linguistics, sociology and philosophy. Furthermore, his studies mainly on dialogue and discourse has changed the way we read texts, both literary and cultural.

 

Bakhtin’s life was concurrently associated with the vicissitudes of the October Revolution of Russia. In addition, Russian Formalism with which Bakhtin had close connections came to exist simultaneously. He was just the writer of an eccentric book on Fyodor Dostoevsky during his lifetime. The most part of his writings were published and soon translated into English in his last years and after his life. Subsequently, he has been recognized as a major thinker concerned with questions of language, society, culture, time and ethics.

 

Though his intellectual development should not be merely explained by Neo-Kantianism, Bakhtin’s starting points are in this tradition. This philosophical orientation which seeks to go back to Kant,is in part a reaction against positivism and empiricism of the nineteenth-century. It mainly focuses on the activity of the consciousness and argues that consciousness is not a blank sheet to reflect the external world. On the other hand, consciousness has its own independent forms to apprehend and explain the world outside. Bakhtin’s main interest in this traditionis in the way he argues the relationship between self and other, I and Thou, through these general questions.

 

Bakhtin, in his early writings, argues that it is in the unavoidable relationship with others that our sense of self and the other is constituted. In this respect, the aesthetic art has been considered as the highest form of human interaction. Therefore, it is the expression of a relationship not the outcome of an isolated consciousness. This can be best understood in what Simon Dentith quotes from Bakhtin:

 

 

 

Contrary to ‘expressive’ aesthetics, however, form is not pure expression of the hero and his life, but an expression which, in giving expression to the hero, also expresses the moment of form. . . . Aesthetic form is founded and validated from within the other—the author, as the author’s creative reaction to the hero and his life. (12)

 

 

 

Accordingly, all of Bakhtin’s writing is situated in a fundamental context in which artistic form and meaning are dialogically shaped between people. It has been best explained in his seminal work, Problems of Dostoyevsky’s Poetics (1984), in which he introduces three major premises. First is the concept of unfinalizability. He argues that individual people cannot be finally and completely explained and labeled. Thus, one should respect the possibility that a person is capable of change. Second is the intertwined relationship of the self and others. He argues that just as there is no isolated utterance, for it always only occurs between people, there is no possibility of isolated consciousness which is equally intersubjective. Thirdis the concept of polyphony, which is of great significance to the present study. It can be best described as the plurality of independent and unmerged voices and consciousnesses. In a polyphonic novel, the voice of the characters are granted full and equal authority to the degree that there is an unfinished dialogue between the voice of the narrator and those of the characters. Furthermore, dialogue is considered reliable insofar as it represents an engagement in which the discourses of self and other go through each other.

 

For Bakhtin, our experience of the world does not occur in a single shared language, but in a various overlapping and often conflicting versions of that language. This multiplicity of languages, or heteroglossia, is only implicitly present when any one of them is used. In addition, any utterance is only meaningful in its relation with various other languages with which it is in dialogue. Thus, the way meaning is constructed out of contending languages within any culture is the focus of dialogics. However, culture intends to unify these languages within an official and unitary language which is overturned by the unofficial, unheard voices coming from the anonymous areas of society. In Bakhtinian viewpoint, this overturning is called carnivalization after the model of folk energy release in medieval carnival.

متن کامل پایان نامه مقطع کارشناسی ارشد رشته :زبان انگلیسی

 

گرایش :مترجمی

 

عنوان : پایان نامه رشته زبان انگلیسی:بکارگیری رویکرد تحلیل انتقادی گفتمان به منظور نشان دادن فرهنگ و تفکرات حاکم بر متون سیاسی ترجمه شده- بررسی موردی ترجمه کتاب سرکوب امید نوشته ویلیام بلوم ترجمه عبدالرضا هوشنگ مهدوی و کتاب همه مردان شاه نوشته استیون کینزر ترجمه شهریار خواجیان

 

 

 

 

 

دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی

 

واحد تهران مرکزی

 

دانشکده­ی زبان­های خارجی- گروه زبان انگلیسی

 

پایان­نامه برای دریافت درجه­ی کارشناسی ارشد (M.A)

 

گرایش: مترجمی

 

 

 

عنوان:

 

بکارگیری رویکرد تحلیل انتقادی گفتمان به منظور نشان دادن فرهنگ و تفکرات حاکم بر متون سیاسی ترجمه شده- بررسی موردی ترجمه کتاب سرکوب امید نوشته ویلیام بلوم ترجمه عبدالرضا هوشنگ مهدوی و کتاب همه مردان شاه نوشته استیون کینزر ترجمه شهریار خواجیان

 

 

 

استاد راهنما:

 

دکتر هاجر خان­محمد

 

استاد مشاور:

 

دکتر مسعود مطهری

 

 

 

تابستان 1392

 

برای رعایت حریم خصوصی نام نگارنده پایان نامه درج نمی شود

 

(در فایل دانلودی نام نویسنده موجود است)

 

تکه هایی از متن پایان نامه به عنوان نمونه :

 

(ممکن است هنگام انتقال از فایل اصلی به داخل سایت بعضی متون به هم بریزد یا بعضی نمادها و اشکال درج نشود ولی در فایل دانلودی همه چیز مرتب و کامل است)

 

Abstract

 

Translation, as a social and linguistic phenomenon, had been investigated from various viewpoints by scholars with different backgrounds. This research aims at investigating the ideological impacts of the process of translation and its consequences on the representation of ideologies and cultures. In pursuing this goal, Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) was found to be an accommodating tool. The theoretical structure of this research is based upon Fairclough’s framework (1989, 1995) which is employed by Dr. Farahzad in Translation Criticism (2007). The corpus used for analysis in this research consists of two books and their corresponding Persian translations: the first book is Killing Hope: US Military and CIA Interventions since World War ΙΙ by William Blum (2003) translated by Abdorreza Houshang Mahdavi as ” . “سرکوب امید، دخالت­های نظامی آمریکا و سازمان سیا از جنگ جهانی دوم به بعد”  The second book is All the Shah’s Men by Stephen Kinzer (2003) translated by Shahryar Khavvajian and entitled “”همه مردان شاه، کودتای آمریکایی 28 مرداد و ریشه­های ترور در خاور میانه. Examining both texts and their translations from two perspectives of microlevel and macrolevel in chapter 4 illuminated the fact that both translators employed different devices to change the ideological positioning of the source texts and deviate the readers from the route they might have taken through reading the ST toward the one they presumed it was more ideologically efficient regarding the community the books were translated for.

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

TABLE OF CONTENT

 

Introduction

 

• General Overview………………………..…………………………1

 

• Statement of the Problem…………..……..……………………….2

 

• Rationale and Theoretical Framework of the Study………………3

 

• Research Questions………………………………………………..4

 

• Research Hypotheses………………………………………………4

 

• Significance of the Study………………………………………….5

 

• Limitations of the study……………………………………………7

 

• Definition of Key Terms…………………………………………..8

Review of the Related Literature

 

2.1. Introduction……………………………………………………………..10

 

2.2. The History of Critical Discourse Analysis…………………………12

 

2.3. Ideology………….………………………………………………….13

 

2.4. Ideology and Power ……………..………………………………….15

 

2.5. Translation and Power………………………………………………18

 

2.6. Impact of Translation on Representation……………………………21

 

2.7. Robert Hodge and Gunther Kress on CDA….…………………..…23

 

2.8. Norman Fairclough on CDA………………………………………..28

 

2.9 Tenn Adrianus Van Dijk on CDA…………………………………..32

 

2.10. Farzaneh Farahzad on CDA………………………………………36

 

2.10.1 Microlevel ……………………………………………………37

 

2.10.1.1 Vocabulary………………………………………………37

 

2.10.1.2 Grammar…………………………………………………38

 

2.10.1.3 Multimodal Elements……………………………………40

 

2.10.1.3.1Multimodal Discourse Analysis……………………40

 

2.10.2. Macrolevel……….………………………………………………………41

 

Methodology

 

3.1. Introduction………………………………………………………………44

 

3.2. Restatement of Research Questions………………………………..44

 

3.3. Type of Research …………………….…………………………….45

 

3.4. Corpus ………………………………………………………………45

 

3.5. Procedure …………………………………………………………..45

 

3.5.1. Data Collection ………………..………………………………46

 

3.5.2. Instrument and Data Analysis……….……………………….47

 

3.5.2.1Microlevel………………………………………………………..47

 

3.5.2.1.1. Vocabulary…………………………………………47

 

3.5.2.1.2. Grammar……………………………………………47

 

3.5.2.1.3. Analyzing the Cover pages…………………………48

 

3.6.1.3.1. Method of Analyzing Cover pages………………48

 

3.5.2.2. Macrolevel………………………………………………48

 

3.5.2.2.1. Analyzing Translators’ Judgments…………………48

 

3.5.2.2.2. Translation Strategies………………………………49

 

3.5.3. Data Sheet……………………………………………………..49

 

Results and Discussions

 

4.1 Overview ………………………………………………….52

 

4.2 Microlevel Analysis…………………………………………………52

 

4.2.1 Vocabulary……………………………………………………..53

 

4.2.2. Grammar………………………………………………………54

 

4.2.2.1 Passive Transformation……………………………………57

 

4.2.3. Cover page Analysis ………………………………………….58

 

4.2.3.1 Analyzing the Cover Page of “Killing Hope, US Military and CIA Interventions since World War II”…………………………….59

 

4.2.3.2. Analyzing the Cover Page of  ”سرکوب امید، دخالت­های نظامی آمریکا و سازمان سیا از جنگ جهانی دوم به بعد” …………………………………62

 

4.2.3.3 Analyzing the cover page of “All the Shah’s Men, An American Coup and the Roots of Middle East Terror”…………………64

 

4.2.3.3 Analyzing the cover page of ” همه­ی مردان شاه، کودتای آمریکایی 28 مرداد و ریشه­های ترور در خاور میانه”……………………………………..66

 

4.3. Macrolevel……………………………..……………………………68

 

4.3.1. Translator’s Judgments…………………………….………….68

 

4.3.2. Translation strategies………………………………..…………72

 

4.3.2.1 ”Killing Hope, US military and CIA interventions since World War II”…………………………………………………………………………72

 

4.3.2.1.1 Omission Strategy……………………………………74

 

4.3.2.1.2 Substitution/ Alteration strategies…………………..77

 

4.3.2.1.3 Explicitation…………………………………………84

 

4.3.2.1.4 Mistranslation Strategy………………………………86

 

4.3.2.1.5 Addition Strategy……………………………………87

 

4.3.2.1.6 Undertranslation Strategy……………………………89

 

4.3.2.2 “All the Shah’s Men, An American Coup and the Roots of Middle East Terror”…………………………………………………..…90

 

4.3.2.2.1 Omission Strategy……………………………………91

 

4.3.2.2.2 Substitution/ Alteration Strategies……………….…97

 

4.3.2.2.3 Explicitation Strategy………………………………107

 

4.3.2.2.4 Addition Strategy………………………………..…109

 

4.3.2.2.5 Undertranslation Strategy………………………….113

 

Conclusion

 

5.1 Introduction…………………………………………………….….116

 

5.2 Conclusion…………………………………………………..……..117

 

5.3 Pedagogical Implications………………………………………..…118

 

5.4 Suggestion for Further Research…………………………………..119

 

Bibliograghy………………………………………………….………120

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

List of Tables and Images

 

Tables:

 

Table 3.1 sample of verb tables………………………………………….49

 

Table 3.2 sample of strategy tables……………………………………..50

 

Table 3.3 sample of each case’s table………………………………..….51

 

Table 4.1 verbs, types of verbs, and USA and its related words as agent in “Killing Hope, US military and CIA interventions since World War II” and ” “سرکوب امید، دخالت­های نظامی آمریکا و سازمان سیا از جنگ جهانی دوم به بعد………………………………………………………………………..56

 

Table 4.2 verbs, types of verbs, and USA and Britain and their related words as agents in “All the Shah’s Men, An American Coup and the Roots of Middle East Terror” and “همه­ی مردان شاه، کودتای آمریکایی 28 مرداد و ریشه­های ترور در خاور میانه…………………………………………………61

 

Table 4.3  strategies applied in the translation of Killing Hope, ”سرکوب امید، دخالت­های نظامی آمریکا و سازمان سیا از جنگ جهانی دوم به بعد” ……………73

 

Table4.4 …………………………………………………………………74

 

Table 4.5…………………………………………………………………74

 

Table 4.6…………………………………………………………………75

 

Table 4.7…………………………………………………………………75

 

Table 4.8…………………………………………………………………75

 

Table 4.9…………………………………………………………………76

 

Table 4.10……………………………………………………………….77

 

Table 4.11……………………………………………………………….77

 

Table 4.12……………………………………………………………….78

 

Table 4.13……………………………………………………………….79

 

Table 4.14……………………………………………………………….79

 

Table 4.15……………………………………………………………….80

 

Table 4.16……………………………………………………………….80

 

Table 4.17……………………………………………………………….81

 

Table 4.18……………………………………………………………….81

 

Table 4.19……………………………………………………………….82

 

Table 4.20……………………………………………………………….82

 

Table 4.21……………………………………………………………….83

 

Table 4.22……………………………………………………………….84

 

Table 4.23……………………………………………………………….84

 

Table 4.24……………………………………………………………….85

 

Table 4.25……………………………………………………………….86

 

Table 4.26……………………………………………………………….86

 

Table 4.27……………………………………………………………….87

 

Table 4.28……………………………………………………………….88

 

Table 4.29……………………………………………………………….88

 

Table 4.30……………………………………………………………….89

 

Table 4.31……………………………………………………………….90

 

Table 4.32……………………………………………………………….91

 

Table 4.33……………………………………………………………….92

 

Table 4.34……………………………………………………………….92

 

Table 4.35……………………………………………………………….93

 

Table 4.36……………………………………………………………….96

 

Table 4.37……………………………………………………………….96

 

Table 4.38……………………………………………………………….97

 

Table 4.39……………………………………………………………….98

 

Table 4.40……………………………………………………………….99

 

Table 4.41……………………………………………………………….99

 

Table 4.42………………………………………………………………100

 

Table 4.43………………………………………………………………100

 

Table 4.44………………………………………………………………101

 

Table 4.45………………………………………………………………101

 

Table 4.46………………………………………………………………101

 

Table 4.47………………………………………………………………102

 

Table 4.48………………………………………………………………102

 

Table 4.49………………………………………………………………103

 

Table 4.50………………………………………………………………103

 

Table 4.51………………………………………………………………104

 

Table 4.52………………………………………………………………104

 

Table 4.53………………………………………………………………105

 

Table 4.54………………………………………………………………105

 

Table 4.55………………………………………………………………106

 

Table 4.56………………………………………………………………106

 

Table 4.57………………………………………………………………107

 

Table 4.58………………………………………………………………108

 

Table 4.59………………………………………………………………108

 

Table 4.60………………………………………………………………109

 

Table 4.61………………………………………………………………109

 

Table 4.62………………………………………………………………110

 

Table 4.63………………………………………………………………110

 

Table 4.64………………………………………………………………111

 

Table 4.65………………………………………………………………111

 

Table 4.66………………………………………………………………113

 

Table 4.67………………………………………………………………113

 

Table 4.68………………………………………………………………114

 

Table 4.69………………………………………………………………114

 

Images

 

Image 4.1 cover page of “Killing Hope”………………………………..59

 

Image 4.2- Cover Page of “سرکوب امید”………………………………….62

 

Image 4.3- Cover Page of “All the Shah’s Men”………………………..64

 

Image 4.4- cover page of ” همه­ی مردان شاه”………………………………66

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

List of Abbreviations:

 

CDA: Critical Discourse Analysis

 

 

CL: Critical Linguistics

 

ST: Source Text

 

TS: Translation Studies

 

TT: Target Text

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CHAPTER I

 

Introduction

 

 

 

• General Overview

Translation has been practiced from the very beginning of the human history. In Perez’s words “it is as old as human kind”(2003: 10). Translation has also been discussed from various viewpoints such as linguistic, philosophical, social, and many more. The reason is that the act of translation is involved in more than language and it always takes place in the cultural and political systems and in the history.

 

Translation studies (TS) owes its development more than anything else to James S. Holmes whose prominent essay, ”the name and nature of translation studies” , was lectured at the Third International Congress of Applied Linguistics in Copenhagen in 1972 (Monday 2001: 10). Since then many aspects of translation, from linguistic to hermeneutic, to philosophical and political have been continually scrutinized. Although most of the first attempts focused on linguistic aspects as the only way to investigate translation, nowadays there are many more tools at hand for researchers to conduct their investigations on the phenomenon of translation. Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), which tries ” to read the traces and effects of power in language and discourse, in text and syntax’ (Hodge & Kress, 1993: 153) is one of these tools.

 

Perez reflects the idea of CDA scholars when states ” all language use is ideological” (2003: 4), and since translation, as a linguistic and social phenomenon, is carried out on language use it can be a manifestation of ideological encounters too. It is worth mentioning in passing that Fairclough believes (1995: 7) discourse is defined as language use in social practices. On the other hand, Fawcett (1998) demonstrates that ”translation, simply because of its existence, has always been ideological” (cited in Perez, 2003: 107).

 

Translation has been discussed from social and philosophical viewpoints too. In this regard, translation as a ”representation” of another text and a way through which texts are distributed is in need of more investigation. Simon believes “with the cultural turn in translation studies we can now define translation as the dynamics of culture representation” or “as a tangible representation of a secondary or mediated relationship to reality” (1996: 137). Niranjana, a postcolonial writer, in her seminal book Sitting Translation (1992: 10) argues that colonial forces have used translation as a tool to misrepresent oriental colonized subjects and cultures. This point confirms the profound impact of translation on culture.

 

1.2 statement of the problem

 

This research makes use of a method based on Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) to investigate the effects of the process of translation on representation of source texts and their authors’ ideological position. The present study takes two political works into consideration. The first book under scrutiny is William Blum’s Killing Hope: US Military and CIA Interventions since World War ΙΙ (2003) which is a history book on covert CIA operations and U.S. military interference during the second half of the 20th century. This controversial book is translated by Hushang Mahdavi entitled .”سرکوب امید” This research endeavors to have a microscopic analysis of Blum’s critical vantage points presented in the translated text. In fact, it tries to probe the delineation of his ideas and trace his ideological stands transmitted via language in the present translation. The second part revolves around the close analysis of Stephen Kinzer’s All the Shah’s Men: an American Coup and the Roots of Middle East Terror (2003). Kinzer, an American journalist, discusses the 1953 Iranian coup d’état backed by the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) in which Mohammed Mossadegh, Iran’s prime minister was overthrown. This book translated by Shahryar Khavajian being given the title of .”همه مردان شاه”  Setting up these political works as the established corpus of the present study, the researcher uses CDA to investigate the ideological impacts of the process of translation. With recourse to this critical translation approach, the researcher tries to find out how translation changes or modifies the ideological status of translated texts and consequently represents the source texts’ authors and cultures differently.