The DOI matches its Crossref record; 186 of the 190 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Research into practice: The influence of discourse studies on language descriptions and task design in published ELT materials
Abstract
Discourse studies is a vast, multidisciplinary, and rapidly expanding area of research, embracing a range of approaches including discourse analysis, corpus analysis, conversation analysis, interactional sociolinguistics, critical discourse analysis, genre analysis and multimodal discourse analysis. Each approach offers its own unique perspective on discourse, focusing variably on text, context or a range of semiotic modes. Together, they provide foreign language teachers and material designers with new insights into language, and are beginning to have an observable impact on published English Language Teaching (ELT) materials. This paper examines the ways in which the four approaches with the strongest links to the ELT profession (corpus analysis, conversation analysis, discourse analysis and genre analysis) have found their way into language learning materials, and offers some suggestions on how discourse studies may influence ELT classrooms in the future.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“It is remarkably resistant to the type of criticisms from the ELT and associated fields articulated in this article and ' notoriously conservative and slow to respond to calls for change from the applied linguistics community ' (Gilmore, 2015, p. 516).”
From The Global ELT coursebook: A case of Cinderella's slipper? (2022) · cites this paper as Gilmore, 2015
Citations
Cites
Grice, H. P. (1975) · Speech Acts · doi:10.1163/9789004368811_003 · Cited by 23,221
Austin, J. L. (1975) · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198245537.001.0001 · Cited by 21,496
Searle, J. R. (1969) · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139173438 · Cited by 11,718
A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974) · Language · doi:10.2307/412243 · Cited by 11,350
Reading images: the grammar of visual design
(1996) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.34-1950 · Cited by 8,709
Leech, G. (2016) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781315835976 · Cited by 7,767
(1967) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 7,532
Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (2014) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781315836010 · Cited by 7,392
Fairclough, N. L. (1989) · Cited by 6,650
Gumperz, J. J. (1982) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511611834 · Cited by 5,861
Research works printed but not linked: 43
- Young, 1994, Academic listening, 159
- Wajnryb R. (1996). Death, taxes and jeopardy: Systematic omissions in EFL texts, or ‘life was never meant to be an adjacency pair’. Paper presented at the 9th Educational Conference, Sydney.
- Ur, 1991, A course in language teaching
- Slade, 1986, Teaching casual conversation to adult ESL learners, Prospect, 2, 68
- Schmidt, 1986, Talking to learn, 237
- Lynch, 2004, Study listening
- Cunningham, 1998, Cutting edge
- Toffler, 1970, Future shock
- Anderson, 2004, Study speaking
- Littlejohn A. P. (1992). Why are English language teaching materials the way they are? Ph.D. thesis, Lancaster University, UK. www.andrewlittlejohn.net/website/books/phd.html.
- Rundell M. (1996). The corpus of the future, and the future of the corpus. Talk at Exeter special conference on ‘New trends in reference science’, March 1996. web.archive.org/web/20040211202044/http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~barlow/futcrp.html.
- McCarthy, 2004–2006, Touchstone
- Zhang, 2008, The necessities, feasibilities and principles for EFL teachers to build a learner-oriented mini-corpus for practical classroom uses, Asian EFL Journal, 29, 1
- Scott P. J. (1987). The implications of a conversation analysis approach to request sequences for English language teaching. Unpublished MA Dissertation, University of York, UK.
- Hamp-Lyons, 2006, Study writing
- 10.3366/cor.2012.0019 · DOI
- Groom, 2009, Introducing corpora into the language classroom, The Language Teacher, 33, 26
- Allwright, 1991, Classroom: An introduction to classroom research for language teachers
- Handford, 2011, Business advantage
- Flowerdew, 1994, Academic listening
- Hidalgo, 1995, Getting started: Materials writers on materials writing
- Baldry, 2000, Multimodality and multimediality in the distance learning age
- Mukherjee, 2006, Planning, gluing and painting corpora: Inside the applied corpus linguist's workshop, 205
- Barraja-Rohan, 1997, Beyond talk: A course in communication and conversation for intermediate adult learners
- 10.1093/elt/55.1.4 · DOI
- Bradford, 1988, Intonation in context
- Brazil, 1985, Handbook of discourse analysis
- Brazil, 1994, Pronunciation for advanced learners of English
- Brazil, 1994, Pronunciation for advanced learners of English
- Gairns, 2006–2010, Natural English
- Burns, 2010, Doing action research: A guide for practitioners
- Swales, 1990, Genre analysis
- Cook, 1989, Discourse
- Carter R. & M. McCarthy (2003). If you ever hear a native speaker, please let us know!! Plenary paper presented at the IATEFL Conference, Brighton, UK.
- Flowerdew, 2008, Advances in discourse studies, 115
- Gilmore, 2009, TESOL classroom practice series: Authenticity in adult classrooms and beyond, 155
- Green, 1995, Pragmatics and language learning, 1
- Grice, 1975, Syntax and semantics 3: Speech acts
- Hutchby, 2008, Conversation analysis
- Hyland, 2009, Academic discourse
- Kay, 2001, Inside out
- Belton, 1988, Lexical naturalness in native and non-native discourse, English Language Research Journal, 2, 79
- Nolasco, 1987, Conversation
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The language of civil engineering research articles: A corpus-based approach
Gilmore, A., & Millar, N. (2018) · English for Specific Purposes · doi:10.1016/j.esp.2018.02.002 · Cited by 111
Self-citationTeaching L2 interactional competence: problems and possibilities
Waring, H. Z. (2018) · Classroom Discourse · doi:10.1080/19463014.2018.1434082 · Cited by 78
The Global ELT coursebook: A case of Cinderella's slipper?
Mishan, F. (2022) · Language Teaching · doi:10.1017/s0261444820000646 · Cited by 60
“It is remarkably resistant to the type of criticisms from the ELT and associated fields articulated in this article and ‘notoriously conservative and slow to respond to calls for change from the applied linguistics community’ (Gilmore, 2015, p. 516).”
BackgroundChan, C. S. C. (2017) · English for Specific Purposes · doi:10.1016/j.esp.2016.12.002 · Cited by 53
Mickan, P. (2016) · Palgrave Macmillan UK eBooks · doi:10.1057/978-1-137-59849-3_2 · Cited by 27
Metadata
- Authors
- Gilmore, A.
- Venue
- Language Teaching
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2015-09-08
- Volume
- 48
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 506-530
- ISSN
- 0261-4448 (ISSN-L)
- 1475-3049
- OpenAlex
- W2460929853
- Cited by
- 41
- References
- 190
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1
- FWCI
- 37.76
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Language Teaching (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Linguistics and Language › Discourse Analysis in Language Studies
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Linguistics and Language Analysis
- Keywords
- discourse studies, English language teaching materials, language description, task design, corpus analysis, conversation analysis, discourse analysis, genre analysis, interactional sociolinguistics, multimodal discourse analysis, critical discourse analysis, language learning materials
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review