An Electronic Magazine by Omar Villarreal and Marina Kirac ©


Year 9                Number 183                    February 6th 2008

12,478 SHARERS are reading this issue of SHARE this week
Thousands of candles can be lighted from a single candle, and the life of the candle will not be shortened. Happiness never decreases by being SHARED




A new year begins and with it a plethora of good intentions and the typical “resolutions” (that we hope this year will be a little less typical) fills our minds.

This will be a hard year for all of us in our family with plenty of tough work ahead but with the promise of many good things to come.

We have started planning our Third SHARE Convention that, as usual, will take place during the winter holidays. We intend it to be a memorable event with a rich balance of times for discussion, debate and reflection and times for listening and learning from top-notch specialists from our country who are well aware of what is happening in ELT all over the world but have a deep knowledge of our Argentinian reality and can offer “real solutions for the real classroom”. But this is only one of the very many delicacies we have on our plate and that we intend to SHARE with you. Marina is planning a special event for mid September geared towards the ELT research community and both Martin and I are already doing our tiny little bit to revitalize the National Congress of Teachers and Students of English (already in its thirteenth edition) and we are not alone in this enterprise, a handful of heads, coordinators and lecturers from the finest Colleges and Universities in our country are in a state of mobilization to bring back our dear old Congress back to the front of the scene again.

Of course, we are not alone: we count on each one of you, our dear SHARERS, in our each one of our projects and we know you will be by our side as in these last nine happy years of SHARE.




Omar and Marina




In SHARE 183


1.-    Beliefs about Silence in the Classroom

2.-    Factores lingüísticos y la alternancia try to/try and en el inglés americano

3.-    Advanced Vocabulary in Context: Tuxedos

4.-    Curso de Posgrado en la Universidad Nacional del Comahue

5.-    Primer Coloquio Nacional Adquisición y Didáctica de las Lenguas

6.-    Great Back To School Ideas! At Maryland ELT Centre

7.-    I° Congreso de Autores Ingleses en la Universidad Nacional de Cuyo

8.-    Courses on Drama Techniques and Storytelling in Buenos Aires

9.-    Jornadas Internacionales de Lingüística Sistémico Funcional y Enseñanza de


10.-   Courses on New Technologies in Education at Net-Learning

11.-   Cursos del Calendario Académico de la Fundación Litterae

12.-   Carrera de Especialización en Análisis del Discurso en la Universidad

        Nacional del Litoral

13.-   III Jornadas de Español como Lengua Extranjera

14.-   The History of Rock & Roll in your school

15.-   Cursos y Seminarios de Posgrado en la Universidad Nacional
        de Córdoba

16.-   Calendario Escolar 2008

17.-   ELT e-reading Group

18.-   URUTESOL National Convention: Call for Participation

19.-   Specialist Course on Intonation in Córdoba

20.-   Actividades de Capacitación 2008 en CETI

21.-   News from ROOTS






Beliefs about Silence in the Classroom

Adam Jaworski

Centre for Language and Communication Research, University of Wales

Cardiff, PO Box 94, Cardiff CF1 3XB, UK

Itesh Sachdev

Department of Applied Linguistics, Birkbeck College, University of London, 43

Gordon Square, London WC1H 0PD, UK


A questionnaire methodology was used to elicit beliefs and attitudes about silence in

the classroom from 319 students aged between 14–16 in three secondary schools in

Wales. The three schools can be described as ‘rural’, ‘urban-suburban’ and ‘urban-inner

city’. The socio-economic background of the students may be described as mainly

‘working class’ for the rural and inner-city schools, and ‘middle class’ for the suburban

school. The inner city school had the highest proportion of students who reported

ethnolinguistic backgrounds other than Welsh. Our overall finding was that students

believed that they were more silent in the classroom than their teachers, complementing

earlier findings of ethnographic and discourse analytic studies. We suggest that for

pupils silence is the relatively unmarked, underlying linguistic form in the classroom,

while for teachers silence is relatively marked and talk is unmarked. Our results also

confirmed the relative importance of silence for learning rather than for teaching.

Specifically, students believed that they were more silent when learning than their

teachers are when teaching. Furthermore, students in the rural and inner-city schools

valued silence in the classroom more than the students in the suburban school, which

we explain in terms of the social make up of the three schools.


Introduction: Silence, Communication and Education


Recent years have witnessed a rise in the interest of how inter-personal and

inter-group relations are both marked and affected by the use of communicative

silence (see, e.g. papers in Tannen & Saville-Troike, 1985; Jaworski, 1997b).

Silence has been shown by many to go beyond the non-communicative absence

of speech and has been described as a complex linguistic item, whose functioning

needs a comprehensive descriptive and explanatory treatment with reference to

various pragmatic and sociolinguistic frameworks, for example, ethnography of

communication (Basso, 1972; Braithwaite, 1990; SavilleTroike, 1985), politeness

theory (Sifianou, 1995, 1997), relevance theory (Jaworski, 1993), discourse

analysis (Bilmes, 1994; Watts, 1997; Coupland & Coupland, 1997a) and narrative

analysis (Hall et al., 1997), to name just a few. As has been attested by these

studies, the functioning of silence cannot be relegated to a few simplistic rules

represented across languages in a plethora of popular proverbs about speech and

silence, whose survey is offered in Charteris-Black (1995). On the contrary, silence

appears as a rich communicative resource whose understanding requires the

sophistication of a fine-grained, interdisciplinary analysis. For instance, although

ethnographic research has provided a richly layered perspective about the role

of silence in communication referring to values (e.g. Scollon, 1985), no systematic

measurements of beliefs and attitudes has been undertaken to date. One notable

exception in this respect is a study by Giles et al. (1991, discussed below) although

their work is not specifically concerned with educational settings. The present

study fills this gap by focusing on secondary school students’ beliefs about the

use of silence in the classroom and begins by examining conceptual approaches

to the study of silence. To this end, silence is discussed with reference to

markedness theory, the ethnography of communication and the functions of

silence in communication. First, however, we need to explain how we conceptualise

silence in this paper.


Definitions of ‘silence’ vary greatly, depending on the theoretical frameworks

and methodologies adopted for its study. Bilmes (1994: 79) rightly observes that

‘there are as many kinds of silence as there are of relevant sounds’. He

operationalises silence in terms of two general categories: the simple absence of

sound, which he calls ‘absolute silence’, and the relevant absence of a particular

kind of sound, which he calls ‘notable silence’. A sub-type of the latter type of

silence is absence of (relevant) talk and is labelled by Bilmes as ‘conversational

silence’. In this study we explore students’ beliefs about silence construed as an

absence of relevant talk (i.e. ‘notable/conversational silence’) and not simply as

absence of noise in the classroom (i.e. ‘absolute silence’).


Sobkowiak (1997) argues that communicative silence is the pragmatically

marked member of the opposition silence-speech, though it is difficult to refer to

markedness criteria associated with the form and content of silence except in

terms of its duration. He suggests that the number of communicative situations

where silence is preferred to talk or where it is expected as a norm, appears to be

rather low. Additionally, silence is particularly deficient in metalingual and

referential functions of communication (Jakobson, 1960: 357), though participants

may use silence in a facilitative way for the exchange of ideational

meanings through the participants’ use of pauses, slowing down tempo of

speech, taking extra time in answering another’s question, etc. (see Scollon &

Scollon, 1987). According to Sobkowiak (1997) due to the limited range of

communicative functions that silence can perform, limited number of communicative

contexts in which it is anticipated, and due to its indeterminacy regarding

its content, silence can be said to be relatively marked in relation to speech. It is

noteworthy that Sobkowiak also argues that silence can only be considered

unmarked or normative in situations which themselves are socially marked. In

our discussion (see below), we argue that the markedness view of the opposition

speech-silence would merit from a less rigid, more context-sensitive approach.

In her taxonomy of situations, ‘levels and domains’ of silence, Saville-Troike

(1985) mentions, among others, silences determined by the following institutional

settings: temples, libraries, religious services, legal proceedings, funerals,

classes in school and public performances (operas, movies). Many other locales

where silence appears to be the ‘norm’, or where it is highly valued, can be added:

recording studios (Enninger, 1987), hospitals, museums, galleries, and so on.

However, Saville-Troike states that many of these settings are also characterised

by different (sometimes limited) forms of talk, and both talk and silence are

determined contextually, ritualistically or professionally. Priests, members of the

congregation, librarians, borrowers, judges, plaintiffs, teachers, pupils, actors,

audiences, etc. do remain silent and talk in all of the respective locales (mentioned

above). Analyses may thus consider the degree to which the communication that

takes place in these settings is structured through talk and through ‘silence’

(Philips, 1985), and which of these modes is to be considered the dominant (or

unmarked) one. Clearly, in such analyses, not only do we need to consider

whether the setting (and the communication in it) is characterised as being silent,

but also how silence is distributed as a function of the participants in the setting

(Saville-Troike, 1985).


Ethnographic research on participants and their characteristics have yielded

two important factors affecting the degree and use of silence in communication.

Firstly, in his classic paper, Basso (1972) has linked the use of silence among the

Western Apaches to the notion of ambiguity, uncertainty and anxiety in

interpersonal relations. Basso’s explanation of Western Apache silence in

situations such as ‘meeting strangers’, ‘courting’ or ‘children coming home’ was

that ‘In Western Apache culture, the absence of verbal communication is

associated with situations in which the status of focal participants is ambiguous’

(Basso, 1972: 83). On examination of a large body of ethnographic research,

Braithwaite (1990) suggested that Basso’s hypothesis was corroborated by many

studies of diverse speech communities, although ambiguity of status between

participants was only one of the dominant factors leading to the use of silence.


The other important factor related to levels of silence was the presence of a

significant power differential between participants with greater silence normally

being associated with participants in low power situations.

One author who brought the notions of power, ambiguity and silence together

(in a critical psychoanalytic tradition) is Walkerdine (1985), who links relationships

of power, conflict, speaking rights and silence with the position of boys and

girls in the primary school setting. Walkerdine (1985) argues that girls (in a

societally low power situation, especially those from a working-class background)

face anxiety and conflict, frequently leading to the state of being silenced,

due to the clash of expectations with which they are confronted at school. On the

one hand, they are expected to conform to the traditional ideal of the passive,

nurturing female, and on the other hand they are also expected to fall into the

modern category of an active, enquiring, discovering child. In the case of boys

(favoured in terms of societal power), their masculinity proscribes passivity and

there is less of a likelihood of a clash of expectations. Hence feelings of anxiety

(at least in terms of expectations) on their part are considerably attenuated, saving

them the intra-personal conflict and the silence associated with it (see also

Murray, 1971). These analyses confirm that variables associated with power

interact with ambiguities of role expectations in order to predict observed

patterns of silence.


Generally, the above review of research suggests that the use of silence is

regulated by a number of factors including the relative markedness of silence,

communicative goals, the setting (and sociolinguistic norms within it), ambiguity

of roles and expectations, and the relative power of participants. Although

attitudes and beliefs about silence are implicit in these studies, they have been

largely neglected in previous research. One notable exception to the paucity of

this type of research on silence in the social psychology of language is the work

of Giles et al. (1991), who examined beliefs about talk and silence cross-culturally

and cross-generationally. Starting from the premise that ‘beliefs include the

evaluation of language behaviours and function at least in part to guide these’,

Giles et al. (1991) obtained beliefs associated with talk and silence from several

groups. For instance, Chinese respondents appeared to perceive silence as more

important, more enjoyable and being used to a greater degree for social control

than Caucasian Americans. Such differences in beliefs about silence complement

the results of previous ethnographic research reviewed briefly above and confirm

that silence and talk are related to issues of control and affiliation in communication

(Giles et al. 1991).


So far we have focused mainly on research on silence outside of the classroom

context. Though few studies have focused on silence inside the classroom there

is some evidence suggesting that high levels of anxiety (associated with students’

lack of confidence) in the classroom are likely to result in silence regardless of the

cultural background of students and the teaching objectives. For instance, a study

involving Finnish learners of English (Lehtonen et al., 1985) has demonstrated

that the learners’ increased levels of anxiety lead to an increase in their reticence

in the classroom. Arguably this anxiety is generated (at least in part) by the

ambiguity in students’ self-perceptions about their own levels of knowledge.


An important basis for perceived ambiguity in the classroom today is the

multi-ethnic and multilingual background of pupils which characterises many

British urban educational contexts (e.g. Edwards & Redfern, 1992). We are not in

a position here to review the literature on that subject, but it is worth pointing

out that research has previously suggested that the multiethnic and multilinguistic

educational environment is strongly associated with a ‘culture of

silence’ (see also Nicholas, 1988, 1989; Searle, 1992).


Biggs & Edwards (1991) have observed that teachers in multi-ethnic, primary

school classrooms interact less frequently with non-white children than with

their white counterparts, and that their interactions with non-white pupils are

less elaborate and shorter in duration than with white children. Additionally,

teachers spend less time discussing the particular task that has been set with

non-white than with white children. Interestingly, there seems to be less diversity

in the numbers and types of interactions initiated by white and non-white

children with their teachers. The (non)speaking patterns reported by Biggs &

Edwards in their study can be related to the notion of ‘notable/conversational

silence’ suggested by Bilmes (cf. above). We believe, that it is the absence of

teachers’ specific or relevant talk addressed at a specific audience that matters

here, and for which ‘silence’ is an accurate label.


The qualitative data collected by Biggs & Edwards suggest that the source of

the discriminatory linguistic treatment of non-white children by teachers has its

source in nonlinguistic racism and prejudice against non-white children. Biggs

& Edwards’ argument of institutional racism operating in teachers’ attitudes

towards non-white pupils may also be linked further to the idea of silence as a

common response to ‘deviation’ from the accepted ‘norm’ (Bruneau, 1973). The

perception of someone’s ‘otherness’ will, of course, depend on one’s stereotypes

and prejudices. The more different another person appears to be from one’s self,

the more profound will be the silence of puzzlement, embarrassment or

anticipation of disambiguation of the situation.

Fat persons, dwarfs, very tall persons, crippled persons with mobility

problems, blind persons, persons with pronounced speech or hearing

disorders, etc., have known nervous silences toward them. Differences in

appearance, such as perceived ugliness, dress, and colour of skin, when

different than the situational norm, seem to be greeted by initial silences.

The strength of these silences seems to depend on the uniqueness of the

difference of the observer. (Bruneau, 1973: 32)


Explanations of silence based on observer distinctiveness underplay the

important dimension of power differences between teachers and students in the

classroom. Gilmore’s (1985) study of silence in a predominantly black inner-city

school setting has concerned itself with the transmission and reproduction of

power through silence. Gilmore’s study of ritualistic displays of silence,

combined with other types of students’ and teachers’ nonverbal behaviours,

provides further insights into the nature of communication in the school setting.


The author interprets a range of students’ and teachers’ uses of silence and

correlates them with certain types of the participants’ orientation and attitudes

in classroom interaction. For example, coupled with specific body movements

and facial expressions, teachers use silence to show disapproval of their students,

scold them, or try to restore order in class. The clear, silent, messages sent by

teachers to their students often mean: ‘pay attention to me’ or ‘what you’re doing

is unacceptable to me’ (Gilmore, 1985: 147). The black students’ silences

accompanied by non-verbal behaviour in response to teacher directives or

criticisms may not only signal compliance but may also signal defiance.

Moreover, defiant ritualistic displays of silence (‘stylised sulking’) not only

challenge authority, but may also constitute face-saving in front of the student’s



Teachers’ silence always marks their dominant status over the students’. This

is how they get and focus the students’ attention, interrupt them, or relieve the

moments of tension. Students’ silence is subordinate, although it need not be

submissive, as in the case of stylised sulking which is a sign of the students’

reluctance to submit to their teachers’ authority.


Gilmore’s work centres on the cultural values attached to the manifestations

of silence in a black neighbourhood elementary school in a US urban setting.

Despite the inequality of status between students and teachers, ‘the uses and

meaning of their silences are actually very similar’ (Gilmore, 1985: 154). The

similarity lies in both teachers’ and students’ uses of silence in situations of

negotiating power: exerting and displaying it in the case of teachers; defying and

claiming it in the case of students. In either case great emotional involvement and

tension are present.


Other studies confirm the idea that power relations in the educational setting

are constructed and reproduced through silence. For example, Hilsdon (1996)

demonstrates how teachers in a secondary (or high) school ELT classroom in

Botswana use silence as a means of exerting power over pupils. Relatedly,

Edwards and Redfern (1992) demonstrated how various silencing and gagging

orders have been used to dominate minority children and languages in

‘mainstream’ educational settings in Britain (and in Canada). Kramarae and

Treichler (1990) argue that in a male-dominated university seminar, females who

are dominated are literally silenced by the males. It is noteworthy that much

research on language and gender in education suggests that boys are less silent

than girls in the classroom (e.g. Swann, 1988, 1992). In early work in this area, for

example, Spender (1982) and Clarricoates (1978) argued that, other things being

equal, boys are allowed to talk more than girls, that they are allowed to choose

topics which interest them more than girls, and that teachers pay more attention

to boys (including addressing them more frequently as individuals rather than

as a group as in the case of girls) in order to control their disruptiveness through

display of attention and keeping them interested. However, the use of talk by

boys to dominate and silence girls in a school context needs further investigation.

In fact, Jenkins and Cheshire (1990: 274) observe that in their case study of 3

groups of mixed-sex pupils (5 persons in each group) although girls used more

features of supportive and collaborative talk, ‘boys did not use interruption to

silence girls or to control the conversation’.


The main focus of the literature thus far has been on the control and affiliative

functions of silence with little discussion about the facilitative functions of

(teachers’) silence in the classroom such as increased ‘wait-time’ (Rowe, 1974),

slowing down the tempo of speech in student-led discussions (Kurtz, 1988;

quoted in Schratz and Mehan, 1993: 248), and so on. For instance, in an early study

Rowe (1974) examined the enhancing role of increased silent periods for

communication, called ‘wait-times’ and the quality of instruction in the classroom.

Wait-time was operationally defined as the length of a pause between

teacher question and student response, and between student question (or

response) and next teacher response (or question). The findings of this study

revealed dramatic changes on several measures of students’ performance

following the training of teachers to increase wait-time from 1 to 3 seconds. For

instance, the length of student response increased from a mean of seven words

to a mean of 27 words; the mean number of appropriate unsolicited responses

increased from five to 17; the mean failure to respond dropped from seven to one;

the mean incidence of evidence-inference statements increased from six to 14; the

average incidence of soliciting, structuring, and reacting moves increased from

five to 32; number of speculative responses increased from a mean of two to a

mean of seven; the incidence of student-student comparisons of data increases;

the frequency of student-initiated questions increases from a mean of one to a

mean of four (Rowe, 1974: 221-2). Clearly, slowing down the rate of speech and

increasing the lengths of pausing more than usual improved the quality of

(classroom) interaction (see also Scollon & Scollon, 1987). Given that teaching and

learning are primary objectives in the classroom setting the facilitative use of

silence for learning and teaching is likely to account for the greatest variance in

the use of silence in the classroom.


A broad conceptual framework for the study of silence in education has been

outlined above based on the ethnography of communication looking at the

notion of relative (un)markedness of silence and speech in relation to participants’

characteristics, the situation in which they operate, their interactional goals

and preferred schemas and beliefs for enacting communication.

The main issues which we would like to consider here then, are whether and

to what degree is the classroom (and the whole of the educational process)

perceived as a silent domain. Is silence positively or negatively valued in the

classroom? When is it perceived as a marked or unmarked form of communicative



Our conviction is that the classroom, just as any other locale or domain, affects

communication in such a way that there are varying forms of accepted/desired

uses of talk and unacceptable/undesirable ones. Put differently, some silence(s)

in the classroom are facilitative and highly preferred by teachers and pupils, and

others will be rejected or perceived as disruptive, embarrassing or unpleasant.

Naturally, teachers and pupils will often be in disagreement about which silences

are attractive or offensive. This paper aims to investigate a few aspects of the use

of silence in the classroom that may shed some light on the desirability and

conditioning of silence among secondary school students.


With respect to the notion of markedness and unmarkedness, we believe that

due to the different characteristics of participants in the classroom, for some

silence will be marked while for others it will be unmarked. Given that, other

things being equal, teachers enjoy greater status and power than pupils, it is their

privilege to control speech and silence. Teachers can self-select to speak,

nominate new speakers, choose to be silent or silence others with greater freedom

than the pupils. Therefore, we might argue that in a classroom situation, in the

teaching frame, talk is unmarked for teachers while silence is unmarked for the

pupils. The teacher is expected to lecture and the pupils are expected to listen (in

silence). Pupils can only talk when they are nominated by their teachers, which

makes their speech desirable at times, but also rather extraordinary. However,

as previous research has shown, pupils may also try to claim interactional power

by defying teachers’ authority by adopting silence as a marked form of

behaviour, signalling refusal to talk when they are expected to do so (cf. stylised

sulking above). In this particular situation teachers’ talk when trying to discipline

students may be viewed as marked.


Given the above, we set out to explore beliefs about silence in the classroom

amongst secondary school students in rural, inner-city and suburban contexts in

S. Wales. Based on the literature review above, our simplest expectations were

that students would report higher levels of silence amongst students for learning

than amongst teachers for teaching. In general, students were also expected to

assign high value to silence in classroom contexts given the facilitative functions

of silence discussed above. The relative markedness of silence was assessed by

asking participants to make comparisons between the beliefs held by themselves

(personally) and those they perceived their peers to hold. It was expected that

self-beliefs would be perceived as being more consistent with the norm than those

held by peers (cf. Weary, 1979). Expectations about the prevalence of beliefs about

silence for purposes of controlling classroom interactions was unclear in the light

of an equivocal research literature (see above). It was equally difficult to make

predictions about the relationship between socio-demographic variables and

silence given the paucity of previous research.




In total, 319 students aged between 14 and 16 (153 males, 162 females, four did

not provide this information) were recruited from three schools in Wales. The

Silence in the Classroom 279

three schools which were selected (and agreed) to take part in the study can be

described as rural (School 1, 73 participants) vs. urban (Schools 2 and 3), of which

the latter were, generally speaking, ‘inner city’ (School 2, 114 participants) and

‘suburban’ (School 3, 132 participants). The socio-economic background of the

students who took part in the study may be described as mainly ‘working class’

for the rural and inner-city schools, and ‘middle class’ for the suburban school.

Rural and suburban school students were most homogeneous in terms of

ethnicity with the vast majority of students being Welsh in these schools (rural:

85% Welsh, 14% English; suburban: 76% Welsh, 20% English). In contrast the

inner city school had the highest proportion of students who reported ethnolinguistic

backgrounds other than Welsh (54% Welsh, 7% English, 39% other

backgrounds from countries in Asia, Africa and the Caribbean).


Design and Procedure


The main independent variable for the purposes of statistical analyses was the

type of school (three levels: rural, inner city and suburban). Dependent variables

comprised (i) beliefs about the general value of silence in classroom; (ii) beliefs

about amount of silence by students and teachers; (iii) beliefs about amount of

silence for control of classroom interaction; (iv) beliefs about amount of silence

for learning and teaching. On all these measures participants also provided

information about their own personal beliefs and those they perceived their peers

to hold. Additionally, background information on age, ethnicity, parental

occupation and level of education was obtained from participants.

A questionnaire (see Appendix) incorporating dependent measures was

administered to high school students in the three Welsh schools. Most measures

were obtained on 5 point Likert scales with higher ratings indicating greater

use/positive beliefs. Participants were debriefed and thanked following completion

of the task.




Preliminary analyses were conducted to see if there were any global gender

differences on any of the beliefs measures. These indicated no significant gender

differences on any of the measures except for a marginal effect for gender

concerning beliefs about the degree to which teachers used silence to control

students, t = 1.98, df = 310, p = 0.05. Inspection of the means suggested that females

(m = 2.6) felt that teachers used silence for control slightly more than males (m =

2.3). Given that there were no other differences, further analyses did not use

gender as an independent variable.


Two-way ANOVAs were conducted with School Type (3 levels: rural, urban

and suburban) as the between subjects factor and student beliefs (3 levels: self,

other students and teacher) as the repeated measures factor on all belief measures

(except the measure for the beliefs about general value of silence in the classroom

which required a one-way ANOVA). Post hoc comparisons were conducted using

the Newman-Keuls procedure where necessary.


Two repeated measures effects were obtained which were general in terms of

being observed across all schools (i.e. no significant interaction effects or main

effects for school were obtained in the following measures). First, a significant

effect for the repeated measures factor was obtained in the amount of silence

believed to be used by self, other students and teachers, F (2, 626) = 35.18, p <

0.001. Regardless of school, post hoc comparisons (p < 0.01) revealed that students

felt that they were generally more silent (m = 3.1) than either other students (m

= 2.7) or teachers (m = 2.6) in the classroom (the latter two means were not

significantly different from each other).

Second, a significant effect for the repeated measures factor was obtained in

the amount of silence used specifically for learning and teaching, F (2, 630) =

104.95, p < 0.001. Post hoc comparisons revealed significant differences between

all the relevant means (all significant at p < 0.01). Regardless of school, students

felt that silence was used most often by themselves for learning (m = 3.5),

significantly less often by other students for learning (m = 3.3), and least by

teachers for teaching (m = 2.6).


Analyses of measures for beliefs about the use of silence for control in the

classroom yielded two significant effects: (i) a significant interaction effect for the

type of school (rural, urban and suburban) by the repeated measures factor (i.e.

self, other student and teacher), F (4, 614) = 4.81, p < 0.002; (ii) a significant

repeated measures effect, F (2, 614) = 16.69, p < 0.001. Post-hoc comparisons

suggested that rural (m = 2.7) and inner city (m = 2.7) students felt that they used

silence more frequently to disobey teachers than teachers used silence to control

them (m = 2.1 and 2.4, respectively in rural and inner city schools, p < 0.05 for

both sets of comparisons). Suburban school pupils did not differentiate between

student (m = 2.6) and teacher (m = 2.5) use of silence to control interactions in the

classroom. Additionally there were no significant differences between the self

and other students’ beliefs.


Analyses of beliefs about the general value of silence in the classroom yielded

a significant effect for school type, F (2, 315) = 6.98, p < 0.002. Post hoc comparisons

amongst the means revealed that beliefs about the general value or importance

of silence in the classroom context were higher in the rural (m = 3.5) and inner

city (m = 3.4) schools (both working class) than in the suburban, middle-class

school (m = 3.2).


These are overall differences and they say little about what specifically

contributes to the use and value of silence in the classrooms. In other words, how

do the facilitative and control functions of silence contribute (i) to the overall

value of silence in the classroom, (ii) to students use of silence in the classroom,

and (iii) to teachers use of silence in the classroom? Multiple Regression analyses

were conducted on the data from the three schools separately with beliefs about

the overall value of silence as well as students’ and teachers’ use of silence in the

classroom as dependent variables and facilitative and control functions as the

independent (predictor) variables. Since preliminary bivariate correlational

analyses revealed a similar picture to the Multiple regression analyses only the

outcome of multiple regression analyses is presented in Table 1.


Results in Table 1 show that only beliefs about ‘Silence for student learning’,

i.e. facilitative silence, significantly predicted the amount of silence generally

used by students in the classroom, and the general value assigned to silence in

the classroom in all three types of schools. However, differences in predictors

between schools were obtained in the use of silence by teachers. Specifically, in




the rural school the use of silence for teaching was the significant predictor. But

in the inner city school the significant predictor was the use of silence for control

by teachers. In the suburban school, the situation was more mixed with both

facilitative and control functions being marginally associated with teachers’ use

of silence.






Our overall finding that students feel that they are more silent in the classroom

than their teachers is consistent with the earlier findings of the ethnographic and

discourse analytic studies of classroom interaction research. As Gilmore states,

‘the traditional classrooms I observed support the generalisation that most of the

talk is by the teacher [¼] and children’s time is spent overwhelmingly in listening

and reading’ (Gilmore, 1985: 143). Likewise, Hilsdon (1996) comments on the

general shortage of wait time in the classroom and quotes others who have shown

that most teachers rarely wait for as long they perceive, and are often surprised

when reading transcripts of the lesson that so little time was allowed (Chaudron,

1988; Brock, 1986; Long & Sato, 1983; see also Phillips, 1994).

In terms of our framework outlined above, we suggested that for pupils silence

is the unmarked, underlying linguistic form in the classroom, while for teachers

silence is marked and talk is unmarked. This discrepancy stems from the

institutionalised power imbalance between teachers and pupils, teachers’ right

to control the discourse, privilege of self-nomination for another turn, granting

speaking rights to pupils, demanding speaking turns from pupils and of allowing

or demanding silence from them (see, e.g. Cazden, 1988; Mehan, 1978; Sinclair &

Coulthard, 1975). Additionally, the primary function of teachers is to teach, and

this activity is, at least in the western world, associated with lecturing, giving

verbal instruction and explanation (see Philips, 1972 for an alternative view of

the teaching process in the American Aboriginal context). Of course, we do see

school discourse as situated action in which meaning is co-constructed by

teachers and pupils alike (e.g. Edwards, 1993; Edwards & Mercer, 1987),

however, in terms of the interactants’ broad, pre-discursive goals which suit their

needs of selfrealisation and alignment with others (Tracy & Coupland, 1990), the

fundamental division between teacher and pupil talk is that of ‘teaching’ and

‘learning’, respectively.


Thus, because our finding is very general (cutting across all three schools,

genders and ethnic groups), it allows us to believe that our distinction in the

relative markedness and unmarkedness of silence with regard to teachers and

students is supported by the students’ expressed beliefs about the amount of their

own and their teachers’ use of silence. At a more conceptual level, this finding

allows us to argue against a universalist, rigid view of silence as marked

(Sobkowiak, 1997; cf. above). As we demonstrate here, the perception of the

(un)markedness of silence depends to a great extent on participants’ characteristics,

role-relationships and their power relations.


Our results also confirm the relative importance of silence for learning rather

than for teaching. Specifically, students’ believed that they were more silent when

learning than their teachers were when teaching. Of course, we realise that, new,

progressive styles of learning introduced in many schools, involve students more

actively, engaging them verbally to a considerable extent, encouraging them to

ask questions, form opinions, discuss ideas and voice their doubts. Given that

our results suggest that silence is perceived to be important for learning, teachers’

expectations for students to be verbally more active in the classroom may be a

potential source of anxiety and conflict for some students (we touch upon the

teachers’ negative and positive beliefs about ‘reticent’ and ‘voluble’ students



Our findings about the general value of silence in the classroom suggested that

students in the rural and inner-city schools valued silence in the classroom more

than the students in the suburban school. One possible explanation for these

findings may be based on the common belief that rural environments are

relatively silent (‘serene’ or ‘tranquil’) with an absence of undesirable noise, while

urban, especially inner-city, environments, are polluted by the invasive noise of

motorcars, trains, industry, etc. (Rooney, 1987). In the context of these assumptions

it could be argued that participants in the rural school valued silence in a

manner that was convergent to the relatively silent nature of their environment.

In contrast, inner-city students may have valued silence highly in a divergent

manner as a reaction against their noisy environment. Future research in

ecolinguistics (cf. Coupland & Coupland, 1997b; Alexander, 1993) may be

designed to investigate the validity of such explanations.


A different possible explanation of this finding has got to do with the social

make up of the three schools. The rural and the inner-city schools had

predominantly working-class students while the suburban school had mainly

middle-class students. Assuming that mainstream schooling in Britain largely

subscribes to a white, middle-class ethos (e.g. Walkerdine, 1985; Edwards &

Redfern, 1991), non-white and non-middle class children are likely to face

difficulties concerning the educational process at several levels including the flow

of talk and maintenance of silence in the classroom.

Obviously, our notion of the white, middle-class ethos does not imply a

clear-cut distinction between all white, middle-class teachers, parents and pupils,

and their non-middle-class, non-white counterparts. However, long-standing

educational research in the UK and USA (e.g. Willis, 1977; Barton & Walker, 1983;

Entwistle, 1978; Lawton, 1975; Brantlinger, 1993) gives compelling evidence of

how the prevailing values and ideologies in education serve the dominating

classes in (re)producing the social and cultural relations of capitalist economies.


Additionally, Hemmings (1996: 30) points out that in an American, urban

educational setting, the accepted idea of a ‘model’ student includes the adoption

of ‘the language, styles of discourse, values, manners, and aesthetic tastes

associated with middle-class society and professionals’. Hemmings argues that

for many working-class, Afro-American students who do aspire to achieve the

status of a ‘model’ student, this means a conflict of having to find unique ways

of conforming to two opposing ideals: that of the school and their peer group.


On the other hand, those whose primary aim is not set on educational

achievement are more likely to drop out from school than their white and/or

middle-class counterparts.

Likewise, we are not suggesting here that there is only one ‘white’, ‘middleclass’

ethos across all of the educational system in the western world. There are,

no doubt, many, different competing ideologies, and students (as well as teachers

and parents) embrace them in ways more complicated than our brief considerations

allow us to mention. However, it seems reasonable for us to argue that,

other things being equal, non-white and non-middle-class students face more

conflict, anxiety and uncertainty in trying to conform to the school ‘norm’ than

white and middle-class students.


Again, we refer to the work of Walkerdine (1985), who critically examined the

problems of gender identity, conflict and silence in relation to the wider problems

of an individual’s class values and institutional norms. She argued that the need

to define (and redefine) the boundaries of one’s identity within the world of

(middle-class dominated) institutions may be a silencing experience for working-

class people. She illustrated this with data from several interviews including

one with a male academic recounting schoolday memories. Coming from a

working-class background, the interviewee explained how having to reinvent

himself in a middle-class institutional context was an anxiety-provoking

experience, which terrorised him and made him yearn for remaining ‘invisible’

(or silent):


It goes back to the instance I described in primary school, made to stand in

front of the class and do up my shoe laces, stand up in front of the class and

do up my tie and secondly, the, this school was, as I would not put it, in

class terms, completely removed from the kind of experience I’d had in

what had been a very localised primary school and so I didn’t want to be

drawn to attention in front of these people about whom I felt very edgy [¼]

in case I couldn’t keep up that standard. (Walkerdine, 1985: 233)

Walkerdine’s work may thus be useful in explaining results showing greater

belief in the general importance of silence in the classroom among the rural and

inner-city school children than suburban school children. Since both the former

schools catered to working-class populations, what we may be unravelling here

is working-class pupils’ beliefs about silence in the classroom, which according

to Walkerdine stem from the anxiety and conflict which is felt by the powerless

individuals who are forced to redefine the boundaries of their identities by

changing their practice in the face of authority. Consistent with this analysis, our

rural and inner-city school pupils believed that they use more silence for

controlling their teachers than their suburban counterparts.


Our findings showed that the source of teacher silence in the rural schools lay

in the facilitative function of silence (i.e. teachers’ using silence for teaching).

However, we also observed that teachers’ use of silence for control was the

greatest predictor of their silence in the inner city school. This finding is consistent

with Biggs and Edwards’ (1991) research which suggested that white teachers

often use silence with members of ethnolinguistic minorities who make up

significant proportions of urban inner city classrooms in the UK. Although the

lack of ethnic diversity in rural and suburban schools did not allow for analysis

by school, it was possible to conduct supplementary analyses concerning

differences between ethnolinguistic majorities (i.e. the Welsh) and minorities

(non-Welsh) in the inner city school. Analyses yielded non-significant differences

between Welsh and non-Welsh participants on all measures with the exception

of beliefs about teachers’ use of silence in the classroom. Consistent with the

findings of Biggs and Edwards (1991), non-Welsh participants (m = 3.0) in the

inner city school reported that teachers used silence to a greater degree in the

classroom than Welsh participants (m = 2.5; t = 2.30, df = 91, p < 0.05). These

findings are supportive of earlier research suggesting that multiethnic diversity

in the classroom may be accompanied by a ‘culture of silence’ (e.g. Edwards &

Redfern, 1992).


In the present study analyses of gender-related differences in beliefs about the

use of silence did not yield any significant differences except one, though

previous studies had suggested that boys are less silent than girls in the classroom

(e.g. Swann, 1988, 1992). The only significant finding between the sexes obtained

in the present study was that relative to female participants, male participants

believed that their teachers used silence for control to a lesser extent. This finding

concurs with those of earlier studies (e.g. Spender, 1982) where teachers appeared

to be more verbally attentive to boys than girls in order to control their



General Discussion and Conclusion


We have reported here some preliminary findings from an exploratory study

of secondary school students’ beliefs about silence in the classroom. Our work,

however tentative, corroborates the results of earlier ethnographic research

which suggested that silence is often a mark of power imbalance and/or

ambiguity of interpersonal relations and participation structures in interaction.

Such claims find confirmation in what students report as their and their teachers’

actual behaviour in the classroom. However, our findings add a new dimension

to the existing ethnographic studies focusing on issues of class and ethnicity.


Many types of silence need to be interpreted in critical terms proposed by

Walkerdine (1985), where the confrontation of students’ and teachers’ values may

work to the disadvantage of the former in that they are effectively silenced and

rendered invisible.


From a conceptual point of view, our research demonstrates yet again (see

Jaworski, 1993, 1997a) that, apart from being a linguistic reflex of the lack of

communication, communication breakdown, feelings of negativity and conflict,

silence is also a positive communicative item. In the case of this study it seems to

be positively viewed as a facilitative device enabling students to gain access,

organise and absorb new material.


One of the areas of future research resulting from this study should be

teachers’ beliefs about silence in the classroom. Our current work (Jaworski &

Sachdev, in preparation) suggests that these may be very different from the

students’. Preliminary analysis of a sample of references written by teachers for

their sixth formers’ applying for admission to universities through the Universities

and Colleges Admissions System (UCAS) indicates that articulateness,

volubility and general eagerness to talk are listed as very positive and desirable

qualities in the students. Silence, reticence and quietness fare less well, and when

mentioned, they are usually hedged about, softened and played down in a

number of ways. Consider a few examples (all from 1996 UCAS applications of

students applying for places in a humanities department of a British university).


In the first instance we quote teachers’ mention of student talk (all names have

been changed):


(1) Anna is an articulate young woman whose unassuming nature belies a keen

sense of humour and a positive approach to life.

(2) All who have come into contact with Rebecca have commented on her

articulacy, sense of commitment and enthusiasm for experience.

(3) She is a mature, articulate young lady, who displays a great strength of


(4) In her personal statement, Sheryl describes herself as ‘effervescent and

enthusiastic’. She is certainly lively, outgoing, and it is fun to be in her

company. Both staff and peer-group enjoy her chatty, refreshing, and

individual personality.


In the above excerpts, articulateness is paired with such positive qualities as

unassuming nature, keen sense of humour, sense of commitment, enthusiasm for

experience, maturity, strength of character and fun. Such characterisations of

students are given in references whose task is predominantly to comment on and

assess the academic qualities of students and their suitability for higher

education. In contrast, teachers’ mention of the students’ silence is couched in

relatively negative terms:


(1) Paul is quietly spoken, but enjoys class discussion, and is prepared to

maintain his point of view.

(2) Although [Sophie] tends to be quiet in class, her research work is disciplined

and she always has a thoughtful approach to the subject.

(3) She is rather a quiet but clearly well-motivated student, with a very mature

approach to her studies.

(4) Orally, John can be a touch hesitant. When he does participate, however, he

can always be relied upon to make valid, sensible contributions to class

discussions and is a useful person to have in seminars. [Reference for a

mature student]


Here, most references to quietness are contrasted with good academic

achievement as exemplified by the use of but in (1), although in (2) and and in (3).

Given that such testimonials are common-place, it is clear that teachers’ beliefs

(and values) about silence may not only differ from those of students’, but also

that they are likely to have a substantial impact on the academic success of

students. In fact, a recent study of the ‘quiet child’ in a primary school context

has been based on ‘the premise that habitually quiet non-participatory behaviour

is detrimental to learning’ (Collins, 1996: 195). As far as we can agree that the

conceptualisation of silence as withdrawal is clearly pedagogically undesirable

and detrimental to the child’s educational success, we have also pointed out that

certain types of silence in the classroom need not be negatively stereotyped. Some

types of silence in the classroom may be facilitative in the learning process while

others may be used as a strategic, communicative resource by pupils and teachers

in regulating the flow of communication in the classroom. Future empirical work

may thus be designed to focus on how teacher and student values and beliefs

about silence affect teaching and learning in the classroom. Our recent work



Appendix: Silence in the Classroom

(Questionnaire for secondary school students)



0. Introductory

1. How important is silence in the classroom generally?

_______ _______ _______ _______ _______

not important very important


I. General: silence in the classroom.

1. Students are generally silent in the classroom.

Never Rarely Sometimes Often Always

2. I am generally silent in the classroom.

Never Rarely Sometimes Often Always

3. Teachers are generally silent in the classroom.

Never Rarely Sometimes Often Always


II. Control and power.

1. Students are generally silent when trying to disobey teachers.

Never Rarely Sometimes Often Always

2. I am generally silent when trying to disobey my teachers.

Never Rarely Sometimes Often Always

3. Teachers are generally silent when trying to control students.

Never Rarely Sometimes Often Always


III. Learning and teaching.

1. Students generally use silence in learning and task solving.

Never Rarely Sometimes Often Always

2. I generally use silence in learning and task solving.

Never Rarely Sometimes Often Always

3. Teachers generally use silence in teaching.

Never Rarely Sometimes Often Always


About you


In part of the questionnaire, we would like to know a few things about you.

Please write in your answers, circle the appropriate one or tick, as appropriate.

1. How old are you: ____________ years

2. Are you: Male ______ or Female _____ (please tick)

3. What is your nationality: ___________________________

4. What is your ethnic group: __________________________

5. What is your first language (i.e. the language that you learned to speak first

as a child at home; if there is more than one language like that please state



6. What other languages do you speak:_____________________


7. Did your father attend any of the following types of educational institutions

(please tick as appropriate):

primary/junior ______

secondary/high school _______

sixth form/further education college_______

vocational above high school level _______

polytechnic/university ______

8. Did your mother attend any of the following types of educational institutions

(please tick as appropriate):

primary/junior ______

secondary/ high school _______

sixth form/further education college______

vocational above high school level _______

polytechnic/university ______

9. What job does/did your father do (state the most recent/current job)?


10. What job does/did your mother do (state the most recent/current job)?



Language and Education

Editor: Viv Edwards (University of Reading, UK)

Volume: 12  Number: 4  Page: 273–292

© Multilingual Matters 1998







Factores lingüísticos y la alternancia try to/try and en el inglés americano


Dra. Rosa María Sanou

Mgter.  Graciela Albiñana

Prof. Graciela Galli

Dpto. Lengua y Literatura Inglesa
Facultad de Filosofía, Humanidades y Artes
Universidad Nacional de San Juan


Marco teórico-metodológico


Aún en las comunidades más pequeñas,  el comportamiento lingüístico de los hablantes  que integran una comunidad de habla  exhibe un amplio margen de variación.  En este artículo presentamos algunos resultados del proyecto de investigación El inglés americano: variación sociolingüística en formas verbales (Dpto. de L. y L. Inglesa, F.F.H.A., U.N.S.J.). Se encuadra en el campo de la sociolingüística, perspectiva teórico-metodológica que analiza precisamente  de qué modo los distintos subgrupos de una sociedad definen sus identidades sociales, a través de sus particulares pautas de selección, cuando elaboran sus mensajes. En otras palabras, estudia el lenguaje  enfatizando su capacidad de representar significados inherentes al sistema social, su posibilidad de convertirse en símbolo de grupo, de modo tal que los resultados de este tipo de trabajos constituyen un aporte sustancial para diagnosticar la estructura social en general, para explicar procesos de cambio histórico y para implementar un diseño de planificación lingüística.

En nuestra condición de docentes–investigadoras del Dpto. de Lengua y Literatura Inglesa,  nos motivó especialmente la posibilidad de  estudiar el habla real de hablantes nativos del inglés -que, en nuestro caso, integran la comunidad lingüística de New Haven (Connecticut, EEUU)--  y así ampliar el conocimiento del uso social del inglés americano y transferirlo a nuestros alumnos.


En particular, nuestro estudio adopta el enfoque variacionista, que sostiene como principio fundamental que la lengua no es homogénea, sino que está estructuralmente ordenada dentro de la gran heterogeneidad que presenta el  comportamiento lingüístico de sus hablantes. Se trata de explicar cómo se manifiesta esa variación y qué valoración de la misma hace el cuerpo social. Al respecto, dice Spolsky:  “The social prestige or stigma associated with these variations makes language a source of social and political power.  Only by including both linguistic and social factors in our analysis can this complex but rule-governed behaviour be accounted for.” (1998: 3).

Uno de los modelos variacionistas más difundidos es el propuesto por Labov (1972) que, con  una metodología propia, se desarrolló principalmente en EE.UU. y Canadá.   Con un enfoque cuantitativo, estudia  las variaciones de la lengua en uso  y sus posibles  correlaciones  con factores lingüísticos y extralingüísticos de los individuos que  conforman una comunidad de habla.

Con el fin de poder cuantificar y analizar la variación en el habla de los hablantes, se  utiliza una unidad estructural de trabajo: la variable dependiente.  Esta es una abstracción teórica que se manifiesta en el habla real a través de diferentes variantes y en conjunción con variables lingüísticas, estilísticas y sociales.


En nuestro caso, analizamos la variación que ofrece  el comportamiento lingüístico de los informantes en cuanto al sistema verbal de la lengua inglesa; particularmente nos ocupamos ahora de la variable TRY TO,  que ofrece dos variantes: try to  (try seguido de un infinitivo con la marca "to") y try and  (try seguido del nexo coordinante 'and' y otro verbo).   Por ejemplo: Try to open the door with this key.  / Try and open the door with this key.  El primer miembro de la pareja de variantes representa la forma canónica, nuclear, más conservadora, no marcada; mientras que el segundo miembro constituye la forma no canónica, periférica, más reciente, marcada, que está reconocida como forma coloquial, en algunas obras especializadas (Random House Unabridged Dictionary, 2006).


En cuanto a los factores o variables independientes tenidos en cuenta  en este trabajo, se seleccionaron las variables sociales de edad, sexo o género, y  nivel socioeducativo.   

La mayoría de los estudios sociolingüísticos de poblaciones urbanas muestra una marcada correlación entre el uso del lenguaje y el sector social al que pertenecen los individuos. En nuestro caso es más apropiado hablar de nivel socioeducativo, ya que tuvimos en cuenta la ocupación y los años de educación formal. Estos grupos son conjuntos de individuos que tienen un estatus social, económico y cultural similar. Los miembros de una comunidad marcan las diferencias sociales que existen entre ellos mediante rasgos particulares de su pronunciación,  su gramática o su vocabulario,  tal como lo hacen en lo extralingüístico por medio de su auto, su vestimenta, etc. El  prestigio que se le asigna a los estratos sociales más altos se transfiere a sus usos lingüísticos (Silva-Corvalán, 1989).

Con respecto a la variable sexo o género, es un hecho que el habla masculina y femenina difieren entre sí. Dado  que la diferenciación sexual está íntimamente asociada a las diferencias en el rol social del hombre y la mujer en cada sociedad, los resultados  obtenidos en distintos estudios no apuntan todos en la misma dirección. Sin embargo,  hay mucha evidencia que indica que, en general,  "las mujeres prefieren las formas de prestigio, ya sea porque tienen valor en la movilidad social o porque evitan las formas estigmatizadas" (Lastra, 1992: 307).


El comportamiento lingüístico de los hablantes varía según el grupo etario al que pertenecen tanto el hablante como su interlocutor. Algunas variables lingüísticas funcionan como  indicadores de ciertos grupos  generacionales, pero además, el factor edad es de crucial importancia para estudiar los mecanismos del cambio lingüístico. Por medio de la metodología del “tiempo aparente”  (Labov, 1972:9), el habla de los informantes mayores se compara con la de los más jóvenes, y así se pueden observar cambios lingüísticos que están en pleno proceso.

Respecto de las variables lingüísticas, se tuvo en cuenta, por una parte, el hecho de que el verbo estuviera modalizado o no, y por otra, que se tratara de un mandato o no.


En lo que concierne al corpus, se entrevistó a 112 hablantes nativos, residentes de la ciudad de New Haven, de ambos sexos, distribuidos en tres grupos etarios -jóvenes, adultos y mayores- y pertenecientes a tres grupos socioeducativos: medio-alto (MA), medio-bajo (MB) y bajo (B).

Se aplicó un instrumento que constaba de un cuestionario sobre datos sociodemográficos de los sujetos y su grupo familiar, y de una encuesta escrita, que incluía un conjunto de situaciones comunicativas, contextualizadas y diseñadas de manera tal que unas promovían mensajes informales y otras, formales. Cada informante debía elegir una de las dos opciones que le proponían estos intercambios verbales.


Análisis de los datos lingüísticos


Procesados los datos lingüísticos, el análisis de los mismos mostró que, en la muestra total, los informantes optaron por la forma marcada try and en un 23% de todas las instancias, frente a un 77% de la variante estándar try to. Esto evidencia que la forma marcada no constituye todavía una variante de uso generalizado en el inglés americano de esa comunidad de habla. Esto se ve reforzado por el hecho de que de los 112 informantes,  más de la mitad (60)  no la eligio ni una sola vez.

En cuanto a la variable edad, los jóvenes y los adultos muestran la misma proporción de frecuencia de uso de la variante no estándar try and: 24%, en comparación con el 19% del grupo etario mayor. Esta diferencia mínima de sólo 5% indica que, si bien la edad no funcionó como un factor de influencia sobre la variable en estudio, try and constituye una variante relativamente nueva, menos elegida por los mayores.

Al estudiar el comportamiento de los informantes en relación con la variable sexo, se observó que el margen de diferencia entre la frecuencia de uso por parte de hombres y mujeres fue de sólo un 7% (26% los informantes masculinos y 19% las femeninas). Aunque esta pequeña brecha confirmaría, hasta cierto punto, la preferencia femenina por las formas estándares, el género, en realidad, prácticamente no incidió en las elecciones de la forma try and.


Con respecto al último factor social, nivel socioeducativo, el procesamiento de los datos evidenció que no se da una clara estratificación sociolingüística, ya que las clases media baja y la media alta usan la forma marcada en una proporción virtualmente idéntica (20% y 21%, respectivamente), frente al 30% del nivel bajo. Es decir que los dos estratos del sector medio  se comportan de la misma manera y se distancian del sector social más bajo de la escala, la cual emplea la forma no estándar con un 10% más de frecuencia. (Gráfico 1). Este margen probaría que el nivel socioeducativo de los sujetos tiene una incidencia relativa sobre las realizaciones de la variante no estándar try and, que  constituye la forma menos prestigiada socialmente.



Esta alternancia que resultó, en general, poco influenciada por factores sociales, sí se vio fuertemente marcada por los factores lingüísticos. Respecto del primero, definimos como modalizados aquellos verbos que van acompañados por los auxiliares modales will, would y should. Por ejemplo: We’ll try and call your husband at work.   /   We’ll try to call your husband at work.  

Tomando la muestra total de 112 informantes, la condición modalizado / no modalizado del verbo incidió en las opciones de los informantes: los sujetos optaron por try and en un 25% de las instancias en que el verbo estaba modalizado, y en un 16%, en el caso contrario.

Los porcentajes de frecuencia de uso según este factor lingüístico se polarizaron mucho más, cuando analizamos solamente las encuestas de los 52 informantes que optaron  por try and, ya sea  una o más veces (Gráfico 2).  Ahora, en las opciones de try and, hay un importante 19% de brecha entre las instancias de verbos modalizados (54%) y las de no modalizados (35%); vale decir que la presencia de un verbo auxiliar modal hace que, en más de la mitad de las situaciones comunicativas propuestas, los sujetos prefieran esta variante marcada.

Por otra parte, en lo que concierne al segundo factor lingüístico incluido,  discriminamos entre mandato directo o no, lo cual se aplica a aquellas situaciones comunicativas en que el emisor tiene el propósito de influenciar a su interlocutor, ya sea para aconsejarlo, sugerirle algo,  o darle una orden.  En la primera instancia –mandato directo-, se usa sólo un verbo en modo imperativo, resultando una orden fuerte y abierta, que no pretende disimular su intención imperativa.  Por ejemplo: Try not to slam the door next time!  / Try and not slam the door next time!


En la segunda, cuando no hay un mandato directo, el verbo puede aparecer modalizado (sólo con would y should,  pero no con  el modal will del futuro), o ser una forma imperativa acompañada de la expresión  de cortesía please. En estos dos últimos casos,  el emisor pretende ser más cortés en su intento por influir en el comportamiento de su interlocutor; por lo tanto, el mensaje adopta  ya sea  la forma de consejo, advertencia o sugerencia,   como en: You should try to see another doctor. / You should try and see another doctor; o la forma de una orden  atenuada  o ‘suavizada’, presentada más bien como un pedido, tal como en: Try and think it over, please.  / Try to think it over, please.


Una vez procesados los datos de las 52 encuestas que incluían al menos una instancia de try and  (Gráfico 3), los valores muestran que su frecuencia de uso es muchísimo más alta en  los contextos en los que el hablante quiere atenuar su intención de influir en  la voluntad del oyente: 62%. Por el contrario, el porcentaje de elecciones de esta variante baja a 35% en aquellos contextos de un mandato abierto, que no respeta las reglas de cortesía, ya que  no emplea ni auxiliares modales, ni la expresión please. Esta brecha de un importante 27% entre ambas proporciones representa el margen de diferencia más grande que se encontró entre todos los factores tenidos en cuenta.




Las principales conclusiones se pueden resumir en los  siguientes puntos:

1. En la muestra total, sólo 52 de los 112 informantes eligieron al menos una vez la variante no estándar try and, y el porcentaje de situaciones comunicativas en que los sujetos optaron por ella fue  sólo un  23%. Esto indica que es una forma relativamente nueva, aún no aceptada masivamente en el inglés americano coloquial de esa comunidad.


2. En general, las variables sociales tenidas en cuenta no operaron como factores de incidencia, excepto el nivel socioeducativo, que influyó moderadamente: los informantes de la clase media ( MA y MB) recurrieron a la variante marcada  un 10% menos que los de la baja, mostrando así que la variante try and   goza de menos prestigio social que try to.


3.   Los factores  lingüísticos, en cambio, resultaron tener un efecto muy importante sobre las elecciones de los entrevistados, especialmente al analizar sólo las encuestas de los 52 sujetos que eligieron  al menos una vez la forma try and. La condición de modalizado/ no modalizado del verbo  incidió decisivamente: en los primeros, el 54 % le correspondió a try and, frente al 35% de  los no moralizado.


4. Finalmente, la intención del emisor de comunicarse en términos de mandato/no mandato constituyó el factor de más peso entre todos los estudiados.  Cuando se trata de  una orden enfática, directa o no cortés, la frecuencia de uso de try and  es de sólo 35%, pero este porcentaje asciende a un elevado 62%, en aquellos mensajes elaborados como una invitación, consejo, sugerencia o pedido más cortés.






  • Chambers, J.K. 1995. Sociolinguistic Theory. Oxford: Blackwell.            
  • Eckert, P. y McConnell-Ginet, S. 2003. Language and Gender. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Eckert, P. y Rickford, J. (eds). 2001. Style and Sociolinguistic Variation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Freeman, R. y Mc Elhinny, B. 1996. “Language and gender” en Lee McKay, S. y Hornberger, N (eds.).  Sociolinguistics and Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Kramsch, C. 2000. Language and Culture. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Lakoff, R. 2003. “Selections from ‘Language and Woman’s Place’” en Paulston, C.B. y Tucker, G. R. Sociolinguistics. The Essential Readings. Oxford: Blackwell.
  • Lastra, Y. (1992).  Sociolingüística para hispanoamericanos, México: El Colegio de México.
  • Lopez Morales, H.  1993. Sociolingüística. Madrid: Gredos.
  • Quirk, R.1979. A University Grammar of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Romaine, S. [2003] 2005. “Variation in Language and Gender” en Holmes, J. y Meyerhoff, M. (eds.). The Handbook of Language and Gender. Oxford: Blackwell.
  • Sanou, R. M. y Nicolás, M. M. T. (eds.). 2000. Lenguaje e identidad social en adolescentes sanjuaninos. San Juan: Facultad de Filosofía, Humanidades y Artes;  Universidad Nacional de San Juan.
  • Silva Corvalán, C. 1989. Sociolingüística. Teoría y análisis. Madrid: Alhambra S.A.
  • Spolsky, B.  1998. Sociolinguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Swan, M. (1980) Practical English Usage. Oxford University Press. Cambridge
  • The Random House Unabridged Dictionary (2006), disponible en
  • Tusón Valls, A. 1999. “Aportaciones de la sociolingüística a la enseñanza de la lengua” en Lomas, C. y Osoro, A. (compiladores). El enfoque comunicativo de la enseñanza de la lengua. Buenos Aires: Paidós.
  • Yule, G. 1998. Explaining English Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press



© 2007 by Sanou, Albiñana & Galli






Dinner Suit Jacket.

Hilton style. This classic Double breasted Dinner jacket has been crafted for your comfort and style. With the mix and match trousers, you can be sure of a suit that will fit.

45% wool, 55% polyester.

Fabric weight 310g.

Matching Balmoral range trousers are available for complete flexibility.

Single breasted option available.

White Tuxedo Available.

Plain back.

1 button to fasten on front ( 6 shown).

Satin Facings.

Selection of Dinner Suit Accessories

Formal Dress Shirt.

Available in Standard sizes 36 to 46 inch chest, and in Kingsizes 48 to 58, with lengths Short, Regular and Long.

Our Price £101.99 

Complete quality suit (jacket and trousers) just £149.98


Classic White Tuxedo

Monaco style. This white tuxedo is just the thing for cruises, or to have something a little different on that special occasion. With the trousers that match the dinner jacket equally well, you can be sure of a truly flexible wardrobe. Please note this is a natural white, not a brilliant white, to give sophistcated look.


Key Features: 

1 button single breasted white jacket.

43% wool, 55% polyester, 2%lycra.

Fabric weight 360 gram for a luxury feel.

Side vents.

Teflon Fabric Protector.

Can purchase jacket and trousers separately.


Black Trousers 

Twin pleats.

Side adjusters.

Lined to knee.

Satin stripe side seams.



Available in Standard sizes 36 to 46 inch chest, and in Kingsizes 48 to 58, with lengths Short, Regular and Long .

Complete Suit price £165.98


Folkespeare Designer Waistcoat

A distinctive range of waistcoats to complete your look, ideal for either wedding suits or to make you feel special whatever else you wear!

Go on, try one of these waistcoats to liven up your suit, for unmatched luxury feel.


These waistcoats have the following special features:

2 front pockets for classic style.

6 button for superb shape and fit.

Attractive buckle and strap detail on the back.

Excellent Crease recovery.

100% polyester.

Weight 280 grm for a solid feel.

Available in boys sizes 22" to 32 " Standard sizes 34 to 44 inch chest, and in Kingsizes 46 to 60 inch chest.

Matching cravats in most options.

Our Waistcoat Price £49.99


© EshopOne,







La Escuela Superior de Idiomas de la Universidad del Comahue tiene el agrado de  invitar a todos los interesados a participar del curso de posgrado Introducción a la Teoría de la Traducción, a cargo del Dr John Milton, de la Universidad de San Pablo, Brasil. Este curso se llevará a cabo los días 11 al 15 de febrero de 2008, y tendrá una duración de 40 horas.
La sede del curso será la Escuela Superior de Idiomas, Perú 2151, General Roca (8332), Rio Negro.

El curso está dirigido a traductores de todos los idiomas, docentes, investigadores y egresados de profesiones afines, y será dictado en castellano. 

Informes e Inscripción: Departamento de Traducción, Escuela Superior de Idiomas-UNCo Perú 2151, General Roca (8332), RN, Patagonia Argentina
TE/FAX: +54 02941 422057
. E-mail:

Contenidos del curso


1. Les Belles Infidèles y la tradición de la domesticación

2. Los Románticos Alemanes y la Extranjerización

3. Las teorias lingüísticas de Catford, Newmark y Nida

4. Los Estudios Descriptivos de la Traducción

5. La teoria de Skopos

6. Traducción y Género: teatro, poesía, novelas, textos técnicos, sites de Internet,


7. La Adaptación y La Censura

8. Análisis de textos


Bibliografia básica


Bassnett, Susan. Translation Studies. London, Methuen, 1980 revised 1991.

Lefevere, André. Translation, Literature and the Manipulation of Literary Fame. London: Routledge, 1992.

Milton, John. O Poder da Tradução, Ars Poética, São Paulo, 1993 (reeditado como Tradução: Teoria e Prática. São Paulo, Martins Fontes, 1998).

Gentzler, Edwin. Contemporary Translation Theories. London Routledge 1993.

Venuti, Lawrence. The Translator's Invisibility. London, 1995.

ed. Venuti, Lawrence. The Translation Studies Reader, ed. Lawrence Venuti. London: Routledge, 2000.

Toury, Gideon. Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1995.







San Miguel de Tucumán - 8 al 10 Mayo 2008


Independientemente de las especificidades vinculadas a la adquisición o al aprendizaje de una lengua, la didáctica de las lenguas extranjeras dirige actualmente su eje de preocupaciones en torno a las dimensiones generales y contextuales de la apropiación y de la transmisión de las lenguas-culturas. Desde esta perspectiva, advertimos la necesidad de generar un verdadero ámbito de discusión y de intercambio de ideas y de experiencias entre docentes de distintas lenguas extranjeras deseosos de conocer las problemáticas y perspectivas de enfoque que ofrece el estudio del lenguaje en el campo de las lenguas extranjeras.


El coloquio se propone reunir trabajos de docentes e investigadores que nutren sus investigaciones y prácticas en distintos marcos conceptuales preocupados por  instaurar y sostener en el país líneas de estudio puntuales acerca de las problemáticas vinculadas a la Didáctica de las Lenguas Extranjeras (DDLE). El interés mayor del Coloquio, centrado en la necesidad de redefinir los procesos que entran en juego en la enseñanza / aprendizaje de lenguas, estará orientado a establecer la articulación entre investigaciones y prácticas docentes.


Concebido pues como un espacio de reflexión y de debate profundo, el Coloquio invita a docentes e investigadores a cuestionarse acerca de los resultados de sus trabajos en términos de pertinencia y/o de impacto para la enseñanza / aprendizaje de las lenguas extranjeras.


Más información


Facultad de Filosofía y Letras. Av. Benjamín Aráoz 800 (4000) San Miguel de Tucumán.

Tel: 0381-4222146 (Int: 7411, 7412)



Modalidades de participación



Las reuniones se desarrollarán en tres sesiones de trabajo de medio día cada una (jueves a la tarde, viernes a la mañana y a la tarde) y serán coordinadas por un relator especialista.

Las comunicaciones no serán expuestas por sus autores sino por el relator de cada atelier quien presentará una síntesis de las mismas y, a posteriori, sugerirá a los expositores algunos puntos para el debate. La sesión de trabajo concluirá con una discusión abierta entre los asistentes del atelier y el expositor.


       Plenaria final

El sábado a la mañana, los relatores de cada atelier presentarán una síntesis final sobre el trabajo realizado en cada una de las sesiones que coordinaron. Seguidamente, esta síntesis será objeto de discusión general entre todos los asistentes al Coloquio.



Departamento de Francés. Facultad de Filosofía y Letras, UNT

Maestría en Didáctica de las Lenguas. Facultad de Filosofía y Letras, UNT


Ejes temáticos


Los ejes temáticos, que buscan propiciar la articulación entre teoría y práctica, se relacionarán con las siguientes problemáticas:


       Posicionamiento epistemológico de la adquisición del lenguaje e implicaciones en la enseñanza / aprendizaje de la lengua extranjera.

       Articulación entre dispositivos de investigación y dispositivos de enseñanza / aprendizaje de la lengua extranjera: el paso de la investigación a la aplicación en terreno.

       Modalidades de evaluación de prácticas y de procesos en la enseñanza / aprendizaje de la LE.

       Relaciones entre adquisición y didáctica de las lenguas extranjeras.

       Enseñanza / aprendizaje de lenguas extranjeras y contextos de apropiación.



Modalidades y plazos para presentación de trabajos


Los resúmenes y trabajos serán remitidos por mail en formato RTF.

Los trabajos serán presentados en español y se deberá asegurar la presencia del (de los) autor(es). Cada trabajo deberá ser inédito, podrá contar con un máximo de tres autores y deberá consignar básicamente: problemas investigados, objetivos, metodología y conclusiones.


Los resúmenes y trabajos serán enviados en formato RFT por correo electrónico a la siguiente dirección donde también podrá recabarse más información acerca de las pautas de presentación:


Cronograma presentación de resúmenes y trabajos

Presentación resumen 15-02-08

Devolución     27-02-08

Presentación de trabajo      15-03-08

Devolución     30-03-08

Presentación final para publicación  04-08-08






Fecha límite

Arancel expositores

Arancel asistentes

Arancel estudiantes


Hasta el 20/02/08

$ 80

$ 50

$ 20


Hasta el 20/04/08

$ 90

$ 60

$ 20


Hasta el 08/05/08

$ 100

$ 70

$ 20


Pago de aranceles:


       Personalmente: Tesorería de la Facultad de Filosofía y Letras. Av. Benjamín Araoz 800 de lunes a viernes de 8 a 13 hs.

       Transferencia: Banco Nación, San Martín 682, San Miguel de Tucumán

Denominación de la Cuenta: U.N.T. Facultad de Filosofía y Letras

Nombre y Apellido del titular: Julio César Mazziotti

Tipo de Cuenta: Cuenta Corriente

Número: 48.110.191/63

CBU: 01104817-20048110191634

Nº CUIT: 30546670240 EXENTO


Una vez realizada la transferencia deberá enviarse el número de operación, monto abonado,  nombre y apellido del inscripto a  o bien una copia del comprobante al fax: 0054-381-4310171







Five Workshops and one Intensive Course to cater for different needs


February 18th to 22nd  from 9 to 11:15 a.m.

At: Maryland E.L.T.C  - Centro de Capacitación Docente DGEGP C – 454

Av. Suárez 1525 – Cdad. de Buenos Aires




KINDER TEACHING by Susana Ortigueira

Teaching English in Kindergarten: a real challenge.

Discover special characteristics of children aged 3 -5 and learn how to exploit specific material with them


Susana Ortigueira is a profesora de Inglés from Facultad de Filosofía y Letras de la Pontificia Universidad Cátolica Argentina “Santa María de los Buenos Aires”. She is a Licencianda en Lengua Inglesa from Universidad Tecnológica Nacional. Jefe de Trabajos Prácticos in the Chair of “Didactics and Practicum for EGB 1 and 2” at at Instituto Nacional Superior del Profesorado Técnico de la Universidad Tecnológica Nacional . She is a lecturer at Instituto de Profesorado del Consudec in the Chairs of Didáctica I, Sistema Educativo e Instituciones Escolares. Director of Studies of her own school of English in Barracas. Susana is a Teacher of Spanish as a Foreign Language (Fundación Ortega y Gasset).



TEA TASTING SESSION by Fernando Armesto

Tea leaves give flavour to life

Fernando Armesto is a  Profesor de Inglés e Inglés Técnico from Instituto Nacional Superior del Profesorado Técnico de la Universidad Tecnológica Nacional.  He is a Candidate to the “Doctorado en Lenguas Modernas” from Universidad del Salvador. Lecturer at Instituto Nacional Superior del Profesorado Técnico de la Universidad Tecnológica Nacional in the Chairs of "Didactics for EGB 1 and 2" and "Practicum" . Head of English- Primary and Secondary- at Colegio Belgrano Uno. Former Lecturer in English Language at Universidad Austral and Universidad del Museo Social Argentino and Head of English at Instituto de Educación Integral . He has specialized in E.S.P., working in the fields of  Tourism, Hotel Catering and Management and Journalism. He is the co- author of the resource book "Tourism" published by Macmillan. He has been engaged in several Drama Clubs and Societies and he has worked with Drama with children, adolescents and adults. Actor and Assistant Director in various plays with the Buenos Aires Players and the Suburban Players.


¿La educación tiene que estar al servicio de los jóvenes?


Diego Pozzi es psicopedagogo (Instituto del Profesorado del Consudec)  y Licenciado en Psicología (Universidad Católica de La Plata). Integrante del Equipo de orientación psicopedagógica de los colegios dependientes de la Universidad Católica de la Plata. Responsable de los Departamentos de Orientación Psicopedagógica y Orientación del nivel  secundario del Colegio San José de Bs. As.  A cargo del Departamento de Orientación del nivel secundario del Colegio Claret de Bs. As. Docente  de las cátedras de Psicología profunda y Psicopedagogía Clínica de la carrera de Psicopedagogía del Consudec y docente  auxiliar de la cátedra de Orientación Vocacional en la carrera de Psicopedagogía del Instituto Padre Frassinetti de Avellaneda. En su consultorio se dedica a la    atención  clínica  de pacientes  psicológicos y psicopedagógicos. El Licenciado Pozzi es animador, coordinador y asesor del equipo de pastoral Juvenil de la Congregación  de los Padres del sagrado Corazón de Jesús de Betharram           


READY,STEADY & GO! by Fernando Armesto and Martha Ortigueira

Start the academic year with a handful of useful tips and activities to make the most of your classes.


BLENDED LEARNING by Martha Ortigueira

Technology in the classroom: Is that for me? A paractical overview of of the different technologies available and suggestions as to how we can use them in class.


Martha Ortigueira is a Profesora en Inglés - Facultad de Filosofía y Letras de la Pontificia Universidad Católica "Santa María de los Buenos Aires”.  She  is a Candidate to the “Doctorado en Lenguas Modernas” from Universidad del Salvador and “Maestría en Enseñanza de la Lengua y la Literatura” from Universidad Nacional de Rosario. She is a Lecturer at Instituto Nacional Superior del Profesorado Técnico de la Universidad Tecnológica Nacional in the Chairs of Theories of Learning  and Residencia Pedagógica and Academic Language I and II at Licenciatura  en Lengua Inglesa - UTN.  She also teaches Language II at Instituto del Profesorado del Consudec. Former Head of English- Primary School at Instituto Santa María del Rosario and director of her own school of English in Barracas. Former teacher of English at Centro Cultural and Centro de Graduados en Lenguas Vivas de la Universidad Católica Argentina. Ms. Ortigueira is a  Practitioner in Neuro Linguistic Programming.


Special Course:




Starting on February  18th from 9 a.m to 11:15 a.m

5  sessions – Monday to Friday


This seminar is aimed at helping teachers who are willing to get started in this developing ESP field: LEGAL ENGLISH

Attendants will receive help in understanding the law, especially in the areas included in the International Legal English coursebook and Cambridge’s ILEC exam.

Also, the instructor will provide materials for classroom use and some practical tips on how to teach English for lawyers and law students.


Cecilia Andrea Irrazábal is a Traductora Pública en Idioma Inglés, (UCA). Associate Professor of Legal Translation at UCA. She has  been teaching English for Law Students and Lawyers for the last six years. She currently works as Legal English Instructor at UCA’s Cultural Center and teaches Legal English in companies and law firms. She delivered a workshop on how to teach Legal English in the XII National Congress of Teachers and Students of English and has been invited to contribute with practical tips on teaching Legal English to the Herald Education Supplement . She will be delivering presentations on how to teach Legal English as part of the Teacher Training Support of Cambridge ESOL Examinations



Before February  16th $ 40 each workshop

More than 2 workshops $30 each.


Methods of Payment:

Bank Deposit: Banco Supervielle cuenta ahorro  51- 502016/6  G. Ortigueira

Bank Transfer: CBU: 02700519 80020050201662  CUIT 27166673416

On Site Before the Workshops $45 each, $35 more than 2 workshops



Maryland E.L.T.C

Avda. Suárez 1525 – Ciudad de Buenos Aires


Phone numbers: 4301 – 8533/ 4302 –9471(9 to 12)

Office Hours: Monday to Thursday 5:30 to 8:00 p.m






Universidad Nacional de Cuyo

Facultad de Filosofía y Letras

Secretaría de Extensión Universitaria


I° Congreso de Autores Ingleses

Asociación de Colegios e Institutos de Inglés de Mendoza


Valores y Cultura en la Literatura Inglesa

26, 27 y 28 de junio de 2008


Objetivo: trabajar junto con la lengua inglesa la mejor literatura en inglés, susceptible de rescatar valores altamente humanos, “la posición del hombre en el mundo, en la sociedad y respecto de lo trascendente”.


Fecha: 26, 27 y 28 de junio de 2008.


Lugar: Facultad de Filosofía y Letras – U.N. Cuyo –Pque. Gral San Martín – Mendoza

Convocatoria: profesores y estudiantes a la preparación de trabajos para su presentación


Tema: Valores y Cultura en la Literatura Inglesa

Estructura: conferencias plenarias luego, comisiones simultáneas de profesores y de estudiantes.

Publicación: no se aceptarán  ponencias que no se ajusten al tema propuesto. La publicación será electrónica.


Presentación de resúmenes y ponencias


Enviar los resúmenes hasta el 2 de mayo de 2008, máximo 100 palabras, por correo electrónico: , con copia a  

Los trabajos, en soporte papel y disquete, deben especificar título, autor/es,  institución de pertenencia. Deben tener un máximo de 2.000 palabras.

Únicamente serán leídos aquellos trabajos cuyos autores estén presentes en el Congreso.

Se publicarán solamente los trabajos entregados durante el Congreso según las normas señaladas.


Aranceles: se comunicarán oportunamente, como asimismo los hoteles aconsejables por precio y cercanía.


Prof. Laura Cassetti de Racca - Coord. Gral. Congreso

Néstor G. Luján - Pres. Comisión Organizadora  

Informes: , ,  Teléfono:  0261-4240278 2615122638






One-session courses for teachers at InterHotel:


Storytelling in the Language Classroom

February 13th 2008 (9 to 12)                                                                  By Alejandra Alliende


       The power of stories in the language classroom

       Techniques for the storyteller

       Choosing and adapting stories to tell

       Storytelling techniques


Drama Techniques for Teachers

February 20th 2008 (9 to 12)

By Alejandra Alliende


       Drama techniques for the Language Teacher

       Drama techniques for the Language Classroom

       Effective role playing activities

Lots of tips and ideas to put into practice!




Venue for both courses: InterHotel InterAir

Esmeralda 1056 1º “M”, Ciudad de Buenos Aires.

Fee: $40 per course.

- Handouts, certificates and coffee break included for both courses


Enrollment and Further Information: 4311-1615 / 4311-0883



Alejandra Alliende is a graduate Teacher of English from ISP Dr. Joaquin V Gonzalez. She also graduated as an Actress from Conservatorio de Arte Dramático in 2000.

She has attended storytelling workshops with Jan Blake and A. María Bovo.

She has taught English in companies and in schools for many years.

She is an experienced actress both in Spanish and in English and has performed in a number of plays.

She has been an actress from The Bs.As Players Theatre Company and has been an acting teacher from Breakthrough School.

For the past six years, she has taught acting at Centro Cultural San Martín and has done storytelling in schools both in English and in Spanish.

She currently teaches English at Colegio Integral Caballito – a primary bilingual school.









La Universidad del Acongagua convoca a las Jornadas Internacionales de Lingüística Sistémico Funcional y Enseñanza de Lenguas                    


Disertante invitado: William Greaves - York University- Canada

“Intonation in SFL”


Presentation of the book “Intonation in the Grammar of English”

Halliday, M.A.K and Greaves, William


23 al 26 de abril de 2008


Auspiciado por ALSFAL - Asociación de Lingüística Sistémico Funcional de América Latina

Plazo de Entrega de Resúmenes: 29 de Febrero de 2008.

Los resúmenes deben tener una extensión no mayor a 500 palabras y enviarse por correo electrónico a:


Pueden presentarse en español o inglés y deben responder a la siguiente estructura: 

Título del trabajo en mayúscula, nombre de los autores, nombre de la Institución,

dirección electrónica, área temática y cuerpo del resumen

Texto justificado, sin sangría,interlineado: simple. Procesador de texto: Microsoft Word, formato RTF. Fuente: Arial 11


Ejes  temáticos:


Enseñanza de la lengua extranjera dentro del marco de la LSF

Aspectos teóricos y enseñanza de la entonación en inglés

La teoría del género en el marco de la LSF: desarrollos didácticos en los distintos niveles de enseñanza ( primario, secundario, educación superior)

Alfabetización académica desde la teoría del género.

Valoración (evaluation/ appraisal)  

Traducción y LSF




Investigadores, profesores de lengua materna, profesores de lenguas extranjeras, traductores, alumnos de las carreras de profesorado y traductorado de inglés.


Las jornadas estarán organizadas de acuerdo con el siguiente esquema:


Martes 23/4 a Viernes 26/4 de 09:30 a  13:30

Conferencias plenarias dictadas por  el profesor William Greaves


Martes 23/4 a Viernes 26/4 de 14:30 a 15:00 y de 15:15 a 16:45

Presentación simultánea de ponencias


Para mayor información dirigirse a:







Implementando E-Learning con Moodle

Dictado por profesores de España y Argentina

Modalidad virtual (7 semanas).

Inicio: 11 de Marzo de 2008




Learning 2.0: La Web participativa para el conocimiento en red


Dictado por la Dra. Norma Scagnoli desde Illinois (EEUU)
Modalidad virtual (3 semanas).

Inicio: 13 de marzo de 2008



Taller Presencial

Mobile Learning - El aprendizaje en La PALMa de la mano

Dictado por Raúl Santiago Campión, Profesor de la UNED (España)

Certificado por la Facultad Regional Buenos Aires de la Universidad Tecnológica Nacional

Inicio: 26 de Marzo de 2008


Experto Universitario en Diseño Didáctico Instruccional para E-Learning


Dictado por profesores de España, Alemania y Argentina (7 semanas).
Modalidad virtual (3 meses y medio)

Título otorgado por la Facultad Regional Buenos Aires de la Universidad Tecnológica Nacional

Inicio: 15 de Abril de 2008



Diploma Universitario en "Diseño, Gestión y Evaluación de Proyectos E-Learning"

Dictado por profesores de España, USA, Alemania y Argentina.

Modalidad virtual  (Duración: 500 Horas, 9 Meses)

Título otorgado por la Universidad Nacional de San Martín

Inicio: 22 de abril de 2008



Más información e Inscripción:

Tel: (011) 4796-0181 / (011) 4464-0350 - desde el exterior (54 11) 4796-0181

Fax: (011) 4032-1247 - desde el exterior (1-315) 71-1615







La Fundación Instituto Superior de Estudios Lingüísticos y Literarios LITTERAE anuncia,entre otros, los siguientes cursos para su Ciclo Académico 2008


Dra. Alicia María Zorrilla

Presidenta y Directora Académica



Diplomatura en Enseñanza del Español como Lengua Extranjera


Duración: dos años (dos veces por semana)

Título no oficial: Diplomado en enseñanza del español como lengua extranjera

Modalidad: presencial


Formación del Traductor Corrector en Lengua Española


(Convenio firmado con el Colegio de Traductores Públicos de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires el 3 de mayo de 1999.Certificados expedidos por ambas instituciones)

Duración: ocho meses

Modalidad: a distancia


Terminología: Herramienta para comprender, redactar y traducir el conocimiento especializado


Profesoras: Traductoras Estela Lalanne de Servente y Gabriela Pérez

Duración: cuatro meses (una clase de dos horas por semana)

Modalidad: presencial


Conceptos Generales de Lexicografía


Profesor: Dr. Francisco Petrecca

Duración: cuatro meses (una clase de dos horas por semana)

Modalidad: presencial



Sintaxis y Traducción (inglés-español)


Profesora: Lcda. Angélica Vaninetti

Duración: ocho meses (una clase de dos horas por semana)

Modalidad: presencial



Informes e Inscripción:


Avda. Callao 262    Piso 3.°    1022 Buenos Aires

República Argentina

Tel./Fax  (54-11) 4371-4621

(54-11) 4784-9381


Horario de atención: de lunes a viernes, de 9.00 a 13.00 y de 16.30 a 20.30 . Visite la página Web:










Universidad Nacional del Litoral

Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias


Carrera de Especialización en Estudios del Género y Semántica del Discurso

en Inglés-Lengua Extranjera


Título que otorga.

Especialista en Análisis del Discurso en Inglés- Lengua Extranjera.


Alcance del título:


Los egresados podrán desarrollar actividades en:

       Instituciones educativas de los distintos niveles del sistema educativo

       Institutos y centros de investigación.

       Organismos públicos y/o privados con competencia en el ámbito de la educación.



Modalidad presencial
Duración: cuatro cuatrimestres (7 seminarios de 60 h. teórico-practicas y un trabajo final integrador)

Régimen de Cursado: Quincenal.  Sábados de 8 a 17. 30 hs.

Inicio de Clases: Abril 2008       


Plan de Estudios de la Carrera:


Seminarios, Cursos y Talleres       

1       Fundamentos de los Estudios sobre el Discurso    

2       Discurso, Cultura y Cognición

3       Discurso y Educación        

4       Análisis del Género  

5       Análisis Crítico del Discurso

6       Semántica del Discurso      

7       Seminario Taller de Integración y Síntesis 

8       Trabajo Final Integrador    


Arancel: Inscripción $300 y 15 cuotas de $200



Coordinación Técnica: Abog.Martín Izaguirre-  

Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias UNL, Ciudad Universitaria Pje.

El Pozo 3000 Santa Fe

Dirección Ciudad Universitaria Pje. El Pozo 3000 Santa Fe

(0342) 4575105 int.121. Fax: (0342) 4575105 int.120.







III Jornadas de Español como Lengua Extranjera

I Congreso Internacional de Enseñanza e Investigación en ELSE


21 al 23 de mayo de 2008


Facultad de Lenguas, Universidad Nacional de Córdoba

Av. Valparaíso s/n, Ciudad Universitaria



Maestría en Enseñanza de Español como Lengua Extranjera y Área de Español Lengua

Extranjera, Secretarías de Posgrado y de Extensión y Relaciones Internacionales, Facultad de Lenguas, Universidad Nacional de Córdoba.



Docentes, investigadores y alumnos del nivel superior universitario y no universitario, nacionales y extranjeros cuya área de interés o especialización sea el español como lengua segunda lengua o extranjera.


Para mayor información, escribir a: o







A Special Event for your Secondary Pupils


A History of Rock & Roll

An educational presentation in English for adolescents and adults, AHRR provides an overview of modern music from its roots in Africa, the early accoustic blues of the Deep South, up the Mississippi River to Chicago and the Classic Electric Blues, to the birth of Rock and Roll in the 1950s, and then over to England where the music was transformed by the Beatles and Rolling Stones. 

The presenters, Mick Hillyard of Leicester, England, and Benjamin Zuckerman from California, USA, are both working musicians and educators, and provide a multi media experience including music (both live and recorded), video, and lecture. 


Topics covered include racial segregation, economic development, and how the evolution of both technology and society worked together to create the music that we all know and love.  The presentation lasts approximately 90 minutes, including a question and answer period at the end.


Contact Ben Zuckerman on

or Tel: 5411 45434549






        DE CÓRDOBA


Seminario: Procesos y Estrategias de Aprendizaje en una Segunda Lengua

Profesora: Mgtr. Ana Longhini

Días: 15, 16, 29 de febrero y 1º de marzo Horario: 9 a 19:00 hs


Seminario: Literatura Étnica de los EEUU

Profesora:  Mgtr. Mirian Carballo

Días:  15, 16, 29 de febrero y 1º de marzo Horario: 9 a 19:00 hs        


Curso: Metodología de la Investigación en Lingüística Aplicada

Profesor: Dr. Mario López Barrios

Días: 28, 29 marzo, 11, 12, 25 y 26 de abril

Horario: 9 a 19:00 hs


Curso: Literatura Norteamericana de la Posguerra: de la contra cultura Al posmodernismo

Profesora: Mgtr. Laila Nicola

Días: 28, 29 de marzo; 11, 12, 25 y 26 de abril

Horario: 9 a 19:00 hs



Informes e inscripción: Secretaría de Posgrado - Av. Vélez Sársfield 187 – Terraza, 1º piso. Secretaría de la Maestría en Inglés:







Extraído de EL DÍA (LA PLATA)


Las clases comenzarán el 3 de marzo


El ciclo lectivo del año próximo comenzará el 3 de marzo en la Provincia de Buenos Aires, según se informó ayer, al difundirse una resolución del Consejo Federal de Educación (CFE).

También se adelantó que sería el ministro de Educación nacional electo, Juan Carlos Tedesco, quien lo inaugurará para todo el país en esa fecha, desde Chubut.


El Consejo Federal de Educación (CFE), que reúne a los titulares de las carteras del país, fijó las vacaciones de invierno 2008 del 14 al 25 de julio, a excepción de las escuelas de la Capital Federal y la provincia de Buenos Aires, que tomarán su receso del 28 de julio al 8 de agosto, informó el ministerio de Educación.


En Corrientes, donde en el actual año escolar se perdieron 45 días lectivos por huelgas docentes, la Comisión Provincial de Calendario Escolar proyectó alcanzar 197 días de clases para 2008, 13 más que lo establecido. Por ello, las actividades se iniciarán el 12 de febrero con exámenes y recuperatorios, y el dictado comenzará el 3 de marzo y finalizará el 12 de diciembre.






We would like to invite you to visit the ELT e-reading Group webpage on the British Council Literature website and see the texts we have been discussing for
the past four months.

Texts are all chosen from free online sources. The group meets online and participants post their comments to a discussion board. So far we have threads open to debate the following short stories:

'In the National Gallery' by Doris Lessing
'The Curse' by A.C. Clarke
'A House in the Country' by Romesh Gunesekera
'Ullswater' by Romesh Gunesekera.

For further information on the group and to join us,please visit


The ELT e-Reading Group was created by a collective of English language educators from all over the world with the support of the British Council. It aims at encouraging ELT professionals to read literature in English, helping to build bridges between cultures and
contributing to build tolerance and intercultural competence through the discussion of works literature.

Chris Lima
Project coordinator











Celebrating our 20th anniversary

Montevideo, Uruguay - July  4-6, 2008


Call for Participation


Topics of Interest


Participants from all TESOL contexts and related fields are invited to submit proposals. Particularly welcome are proposals related to next year's theme ”Challenge and achievement”, focusing on building communities of practice, inquiry and cooperation . URUTESOL also welcomes proposals concerning the future of the profession, especially those with a global perspective on professional development. Presentations on research in language teaching and learning and presentations using interactive formats that engage the audience and focus on classroom practices are also encouraged.



Types of Proposals


URUTESOL  invites proposals for papers,  demonstrations, workshops , colloquia and poster  session.


Paper (45 minutes): An oral summary, with occasional reference to notes or a text, that discusses the presenters work in relation to theory or practice. Handouts and audiovisual aids may be used.


Demonstration (45 minutes): Shows, rather than tells, a technique for teaching or testing The presenter should briefly explain the theory underlying the technique. The presenter provides handouts and may use audiovisual aids.


Workshop (1 hour, 30 minutes): A carefully structured, hands-on professional development activity. The leader helps participants solve a problem or develop a specific teaching or research technique.


Colloquium (1 hour, 30 minutes): A forum for a group of scholars to formally present and discuss current EFL and ESL issues. Presenters exchange papers in advance and formally respond to each other's positions. The colloquium organizer is responsible for securing participants who represent various viewpoints in the field before submitting a proposal.


Poster Session: (45 minutes): A self-explanatory exhibit that allows for informal discussion with participants.

The poster is to be mounted on a display board that includes a title, the name and institutional affiliation of the presenter(s), and a brief text with clearly labeled photos, drawings, graphs, or charts. Presenters are available for discussion.





To submit your proposal via e- mail, please complete the following steps:


1.      Send the completed, two-page proposal form and the  abstract for the academic committee by the appropriate deadline to

2.      URUTESOL must receive proposals by the due date, March 15, 2008


3.      URUTESOL will send you an e-mail message to confirm receipt of your proposal.


4.      If your e-mail address changes after the submission of your proposal, send an e-mail message to  as soon as possible.



Abstract for the Academic Committee


       will not exceed 300 words. Proposals submitted with longer session descriptions will be disqualified.

       will have a clearly stated purpose and point of view

       will include supporting details and examples

       will contain evidence of current practices and/or research

       will use an appropriate format (e.g., paper, demonstration)

       will include a variety of techniques (e.g., activities, visuals)

       will show appropriate amount of material for the allotted time

       will demonstrate careful editing and proofreading


The Convention Academic Committee seeks balance in


       range of topics

       level of expertise

       interests covered

       professional and geographic distribution of the participants

       relevance of the proposal to the needs of English language teaching professionals and the convention' s theme




Another important factor is how well the abstract for the academic committee  is written. Abstracts should possess: 



       clarity of purpose



       significance for the intended audience

       evidence of a high standard of research (if relevant)


Factors Disqualifying a Proposal


1.      The presentation promotes commercial interests ( except those sponsored by publishers or bookshops).

2.      The proposal is not completed according to the guidelines outlined in this Call for                                   Participation

3.      The proposal was not received at Urutesol ´s mail by the appropriate deadline: March 15, 2008


Web page:

E-mail address:






Intonation in English

William S. Greaves



El Prof. William S. Greaves (York University, Toronto, Canada) desarrollará y actualizará conceptos fundamentales sobre la entonación del inglés desde la perspectiva de la  Lingüística Sistémico Funcional y la teoría de Michael Halliday.



Fechas: mes de abril 2008, con días a confirmar

Duración: 20 horas reloj

Modalidad: Presencial con uso de laboratorio de idiomas (programa Praat)


Destinatarios: Profesores, traductores y licenciados en inglés con la fonética y fonología como área de interés


Por las características del curso, el cupo será limitado a no más de 20 participantes.


Facultad de Lenguas - Universidad Nacional de Córdoba

Av. Vélez Sársfield 187 y Av. Valparaíso S/N, Ciudad Universitaria

CPA X5000JJB • Tel/Fax +00 54 0351 4331073 al 75 int. 30



William S. Greaves is Emeritus Associate Professor in the English Department at Glendon College, York University, Toronto, which he joined in 1967. His co-authored book (with M.A.K. Halliday) Intonation in the Grammar of English will be published in 2008 by Equinox Publishing Ltd.







El CETI se complace en anunciar las nuevas propuestas para sus cursos de capacitación y actualización profesional y compartir con estudiantes y colegas los proyectos orientados a que los asistentes estén mejor preparados para enfrentar el mercado laboral:


Curso de Perito Intérprete para traductores públicos   

Duración: tres cuatrimestres. Articulable con el Curso de Interpretación de Conferencias.

A partir del 2 de abril, los días miércoles de 18.30 a 20.30 hs.


Curso de Interpretación de Conferencias

Idiomas de trabajo: Inglés-Español y Portugués-Español.   

Inglés: a partir del 2 de abril, los días miércoles de 18.30 a 20.30 hs.

Portugués: a partir del 1º de abril, los días martes de 18.30 a 20.30 hs.


Coordinación de ambos cursos: Olga Álvarez de Barr traductora pública e intérprete de conferencias, miembro del CTPCBA (Colegio de Traductores Públicos de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires), AIIC (Asociación Internacional de Interpretación de Conferencias), ADICA (Asociación de Intérpretes de Conferencias de la Argentina) y APIC (Associação Profissional de Intérpretes de Conferência).


Admisión a ambos cursos: En función de un diagnóstico desarrollado durante una entrevista personal.


Curso de Traducción para Subtitulado y Doblaje

Duración: Seis meses  

Coordinación: Julia Benseñor, traductora pública y técnico científica, directora del CETI.

A partir del 1º de abril, los días martes de 18.30 a 20.30 hs.



Actualización en lengua inglesa

A cargo de Alfredo Jaeger, MSc en ELT Management, Gran Bretaña. Profesor Titular de Lengua y Literatura Inglesa, IES en Lenguas Vivas "Juan R. Fernández". Ex consultor del Proyecto OEA/CONET en el área de Inglés con Fines Específicos.

A partir del 3 de abril, los días jueves de 18.30 a 20.30 hs. Duración: 8 clases.


Traducción de textos médicos (Módulo I)

A cargo de Pamela Fioravanti, traductora pública y técnico-científica especializada en medicina. Colaboradora de instituciones hospitalarias.

A partir del 3 de abril, los días jueves de 18.30 a 20.30 hs. Duración: 8 clases.

Módulo II: a partir del 5 de junio. Duración: 8 clases.



Inscripción y aranceles


Vacantes: 12 por taller

Horario de inscripción: de 11 a 17 horas

Aranceles (Incluye el material): Bonificaciones para asistentes a más de un curso   

Interpretación de Conferencias (primer año): 8 cuotas mensuales de $240 + matrícula de $120

Perito Intérprete (primer año): 8 cuotas mensuales de $240 + matrícula de $120

Traducción para subtitulado y doblaje: 8 cuotas mensuales de $200

Talleres bimestrales de lengua y traducción: $220 por mes

Forma de pago: Consultar por correo electrónico

Se expiden constancias de asistencia



Centro de Traducción e Interpretación

Junín 143 1 A - C1026ABC Buenos Aires - República Argentina

Telefax: (54 11) 4953-1212 -










Our dear SHARER Silvia Mackenzie from ROOTS Bookshop writes to us:


Dear Colleagues,

We are four Years Old! Ad good news!!!!

We are relocating to new premises.

As from February our new address will be:

Primeros Pobladores 899 – (8300) Neuquen  (It's a free parking area)

We are keeping our telephone and our mail: 0299 443 1881


ROOTS Bookshop   - A Place for English

The Right Place in Patagonia




We would like to finish this issue of SHARE with a message from our dear SHARER Diana Englebert Moody:


Dear Omar & rest of Villareal Clan:


Another year, another chapter closing in our path.

What really counts, besides all the ups & downs we may have encountered, is our mutual compromise as SHARERS.

May 2008 deepen our spiritual and professional values within our teaching community guided by our Greatest TEACHER and let us all SHARE and enjoy our blessings!


Love to you all!





Omar and Marina.



SHARE is distributed free of charge. All announcements in this electronic magazine are also absolutely free of charge. We do not endorse any of the services announced or the views expressed by the contributors.  For more information about the characteristics and readership of SHARE visit:

VISIT OUR WEBSITE : There you can read all past  issues of SHARE in the section SHARE ARCHIVES.