“You focus, I’m talking”: A CHAT analysis of mobile dictionary use in an advanced EFL class

References

• Alptekin, C. 1993. “Target-Language Culture in EFL materials.” ELT Journal 47 (2): 136–143. doi: 10.1093/elt/47.2.136
   Google Scholar
• Azabdaftari, B., and M. A. Mozaheb. 2012. “Comparing Vocabulary Learning of EFL Learners by Using Two Different Strategies: Mobile Learning vs Flashcards.” The EUROCALL Review 20 (2): 47–59.
   Google Scholar
• Bartlett, L. 2005. “Identity Work and Cultural Artefacts in Literacy Learning and Use: A Sociocultural Analysis.” Language and Education 19 (1): 1–9. doi: 10.1080/09500780508668801
   Google Scholar
• Bartlett, L. 2008. “To Seem and to Feel: Engaging Cultural Artefacts to ‘Do’ Literacy.” In Literacies, Global and Local, edited by M. Prinsloo and M. Baynham. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Başoğulu, E. B., and O. Akedmir. 2010. “A Comparison of Undergraduate Students’ English Vocabulary Learning: Using Mobile Phones and Flashcards.” Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology 9 (3): 1–7.
   Google Scholar
• Baxter, J. 2002. “Competing Discourses in the Classroom: A Post-Structuralist Discourse Analysis of Girls’ and Boys’ Speech in Public Contexts.” Discourse and Society 13 (6): 827–842. doi: 10.1177/0957926502013006760
   Google Scholar
• Benson, P. 2007. “Autonomy in Language Teaching and Learning.” Language Teaching 40 (1): 21–40. doi: 10.1017/S0261444806003958
   Google Scholar
• Boag-Munroe, G. 2004. “Wrestling with Words and Meanings: Finding a Tool for Analysing Language in Activity Theory.” Educational Review 56 (2): 165–182. doi: 10.1080/0031910410001693254
   Google Scholar
• Cameron, D. 2002. “Globalization and the Teaching of ‘Communication Skills’.” In Globalization and Language Teaching, edited by D. Block and D. Cameron. 67–82. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Canagarajah, A. S. 2002. “Globalization, Methods, and Practice in Periphery Classrooms.” In Globalization and Language Teaching, edited by D. Block and D. Cameron. 134–150. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Chan, A. Y. W. 2012. “The use of a Monolingual Dictionary for Meaning Determination by Advanced Cantonese ESL Learners in Hong Kong.” Applied Linguistics 33 (2): 115–140. doi: 10.1093/applin/amr038
   Google Scholar
• Chapelle, C. A., and P. A. Duff. 2003. “Some Guidelines for Conducting Quantitative and Qualitative Research in TESOL.” TESOL Quarterly 37 (1): 157–178. doi: 10.2307/3588471
   Google Scholar
• Chinnery, G. M. 2006. “Emerging Technologies: Going to the MALL.” Language Learning and Technology 10 (1): 9–16.
   Google Scholar
• Chon, Y. V. 2009. “The Electonic Dictionary for Writing: A Solution or Problem?” International Journal of Lexicography 22 (1): 23–54. doi: 10.1093/ijl/ecn034
   Google Scholar
• Donato, R. 1994. “Collective Scaffolding in Second Language Learning.” In Vygotskian Approaches to Second Language Research, edited by J. P. Lantolf and G. Appel, 33–56. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
   Google Scholar
• Engeström, Y. 1987. Learning by Expanding: An Activity-Theoretical Approach to Developmental Research. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit.
   Google Scholar
• Engeström, Y. 1999. “Activity Theory and Transformation.” In Perspectives on Activity Theory, edited by Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen and R-L. Punamäki, 19–38. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fairclough, N. 1992. Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fairclough, N. 1995. Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language. London: Longman.
   Google Scholar
• Gallimore, R., and R. Tharp. 1992. “Teaching Mind in Society: Teaching, Schooling and Literate Discourse.” In Vygotsky and Education: Instructional Implications and Applications of Sociohistorical Psychology, edited by L. C. Moll, 175–205. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gee, J. P. 1996. Social Linguistics and Literacies: Ideology in Discourses. Second edition. London: Taylor & Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Gee, J. P. 2005. An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and Method. Second edition. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Hagood, M. C. 2000. “New Times, New Millenium, New Literacies.” Reading Research and Instruction 39 (4): 311–328. doi: 10.1080/19388070009558328
   Google Scholar
• Hammersly, M. 1994. “Introducing Ethnography.” In Researching Language and Literacy in Social Context, edited by D. Graddol, J. Maybin, and B. Stierer, 1–17. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
   Google Scholar
• Hardman, J. 2005a. “Activity Theory as a Framework for Understanding Teachers’ Perceptions of Computer Usage at a Primary School Level in South Africa.” South African Journal of Education 25 (4): 258–265.
   Google Scholar
• Hardman, J. 2005b. “An Exploratory Case Study of Computer Use in a Primary School Mathematics Classroom: New Technology, New Pedagogy.” Perspectives in Education 23 (4): 1–13.
   Google Scholar
• Hardman, J. 2008. “Researching Pedagogy: An Activity Theory Approach.” Journal of Education 45 (1): 65–95.
   Google Scholar
• Hardman, J., and D. N’gambi. 2003. “A Questioning Environment for Scaffolding Learners’ Questioning Engagement with Academic Text: A University Case Study.” South African Journal of Higher Education 17 (2): 139–146.
   Google Scholar
• Hill, D. H., and M. Cole. 1995. “Between Discourse and Schema: Reformulating a Cultural-Historical Approach to Culture and Mind.” Anthropology and Education Quarterly 26 (4): 475–489. doi: 10.1525/aeq.1995.26.4.05x1065y
   Google Scholar
• Huang, L-L., and C-C. Lin. 2011. “EFL Learners’ Reading on Mobile Phones.” JALTCALL Journal 7 (1): 61–78.
   Google Scholar
• Jaffer, S., D. N’gambi, and I. Czerniewicz, L. 2007. “The Role of ICTs in Higher Education in South Africa: One Strategy for Addressing Teaching and Learning Challenges.” International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology 3 (4): 131–142.
   Google Scholar
• Janks, H. 2000. “Domination, Access, Diversity and Design: A Synthesis for Critical Literacy Education.” Educational Review 52 (2): 175–186. doi: 10.1080/713664035
   Google Scholar
• Janks, H. 2009. Literacy and Power. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Jarvis, H, and M. Achilleos. 2013. “From Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) to Mobile Assisted Language Use (MALU).” TESL-EJ 16 (4): 1–18.
   Google Scholar
• Jewitt, C., and R. Oyama. 2001. “Visual Meaning: A Social Semiotic Approach.” In The Handbook of Visual Analysis, edited by T. van Leeuwen and C. Jewitt, 134–156. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Kaptelinin, V. 2013. “Activity Theory.” In The Encyclopedia of Human–Computer Interaction, edited by M. Soegaard and R. F. Dam. Second edition. Aarhus: Interaction Design Foundation. http://www.interaction-design.org/encyclopedia/activity_theory.html (accessed August 17, 2013).
   Google Scholar
• Kaptelinin, V., and B. A. Nardi. 2006. Acting with Technology: Activity Theory and Interactive Design. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kim, D., D. Rueckert, D-J. Kim, and D. Seo. 2013. “Students’ Perceptions and Experiences of Mobile Learning.” Language Learning and Technology 17 (3): 52–73.
   Google Scholar
• Kukulska-Hulme, A., and L. Shield. 2008. “An Overview of Mobile Assisted Language Learning: From Content Delivery to Supported Collaboration and Interaction.” ReCALL 20 (3): 271–289. doi: 10.1017/S0958344008000335
   Google Scholar
• Lantolf, J. P., and T. G. Beckett. 2009. “Sociocultural Theory and Second Language Acquisition.” Language Teaching 42 (4): 459–475. doi: 10.1017/S0261444809990048
   Google Scholar
• Lantolf, J. P., and P. B. Genung. 2002. “I’d Rather Switch than Fight: An Activity Theoretical Dtudy of Power, Success, and Failure in a Foreign Language.” In Language Acquisition and Language Socialization: Ecological Perspectives, edited by C. J. Kramsch, 175–196. London: Continuum.
   Google Scholar
• Lemke, J. L. 2002. “Travels in Hypermodality.” Visual Communication 1 (3): 299–325. doi: 10.1177/147035720200100303
   Google Scholar
• Leont’ev, A. N. 1981. Problems of the Development of the Mind. Moscow: Progress.
   Google Scholar
• Lund, A. 2006. “The Multiple Contexts of Online Language Teaching.” Language Teaching Research 10 (2): 181–204. doi: 10.1191/1362168806lr191oa
   Google Scholar
• Nassaji, H., and G. Wells. 2000. “What’s the Use of ‘Triadic Dialogue’? An Investigation of Student-Teacher Interaction.” Applied Linguistics 21 (3): 376–406. doi: 10.1093/applin/21.3.376
   Google Scholar
• Norton, B. 2013. Identity and Language Learning: Extending the Conversation. Second edition. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
   Google Scholar
• Nunan, D. 1995. “Closing the Gap Between Learning and Instruction.” TESOL Quarterly 29 (1): 133–158. doi: 10.2307/3587808
   Google Scholar
• Oliver, M. 2011. “Technological Determinism in Educational Technology Research: Some Alternative Ways of Thinking about the Relationship Between Learning and Technology.” Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 27 (5): 373–384. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00406.x
   Google Scholar
• Richards, J. C. 2006. Communicative Language Teaching Today. New York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Roth, W-M., and Y-J. Lee. 2007. “Vygotsky’s Neglected Legacy: Cultural-Historical Activity Theory.” Review of Educational Research 77 (2): 186–232. doi: 10.3102/0034654306298273
   Google Scholar
• Rowe, S. 2004. “Discourse in Activity and Activity in Discourse.” In An Introduction to Critical Discourse Analysis in Education, edited by R. Rogers, 79–96. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Russell, D. L., and A. Schneiderheinze. 2005. “Understanding Innovation in Education Using Activity Theory.” Educational Technology and Society 8 (1): 38–53.
   Google Scholar
• Savignon, S. J. 2002. Interpreting Communicative Language Teaching: Contexts and Concerns in Teacher Education. New Haven, CN: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Vygotsky, L. 1962. Thought and Language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Vygotsky, L. 1997. “Interaction Between Development and Learning”. In Readings on the Development of Children, edited by M. Gauvain and M. Cole, 29–36. Second edition. New York: W. H. Freeman.
   Google Scholar
• Wallace, C. 2006. “The Text, Dead or Alive: Expanding Textual Repertoires in the Adult ESOL Classroom”. Linguistics and Education 17 (1): 74–90. doi: 10.1016/j.linged.2006.08.006
   Google Scholar
• Wang, S., and S. Smith. 2013. “Reading and Grammar Learning Through Mobile Phones.” Language Learning and Technology 17 (3): 117–134.
   Google Scholar
• Warschauer, M., and C. Meskill. 2000. “Technology and Second Language Teaching.” In Handbook of Undergraduate Second Language Education, edited by J. W. Rosenthal, 303–318. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Wells, G. 2002. “The Role of Dialogue in Activity Theory.” Mind, Culture and Activity 9 (1): 43–66. doi: 10.1207/S15327884MCA0901_04
   Google Scholar
• Wells, G., and R. M. Arauz. 2006. “Dialogue in the Classroom.” Journal of the Learning Sciences 15 (3): 379–428. doi: 10.1207/s15327809jls1503_3
   Google Scholar
• Yamagata-Lynch, L. C. 2010. Activity Systems Analysis Methods: Understanding Complex Learning Environments. New York: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Yin, R. K. 2009. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Fourth edition. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar