English Education

introduce what we call variable evidentiality. In (1), Korean -te-introduces the implication that the speaker perceived the event denoted by the prejacent (direct evidentiality) or the implication that the speaker infers the prejacent based on perceived evidence (inferential evidentiality), depending on the absence/presence of a tense. Similarly, (2) shows Bulgarian -l can be used when the speaker has inferential or hearsay evidence (inferential vs. hearsay evidentiality: Smirnova 2013, a.o.). (1) a. Pi-ka o-te-la. 'It is raining.' Rain-Nom come-te-Decl (~> I saw that it rained) b. Pi-ka o-ass-te-la. 'It rained.' (~> I infer that it rained from Rain-Nom come-Past-te-Decl perceived evidence such as the wet ground) (2) Maria svirela na piano. 'Maria plays the piano.' Maria Plays.Imperf.Pres.Ple on piano (~> I heard/I inferred) Relative tense? proposes that a tense under -te-should be evaluated not against the utterance time (UT) but against the time when the speaker learned the evidence (Learning Time, LT): when LT follows the time when the event of the prejacent occurred (Event Time, ET), the past tense is used, whereas when LT overlaps with ET, no overt tense is used. That is, the variability is due to the relation between ET and LT. Similarly, Koev (2017) argues that the indirectness is because -l requires the prejacent be spatiotemporally distant from the perceived evidence, and unlike -l, -te-allows the temporal and spatial overlap between the prejacent and the perceived evidence. However, with respect to the temporal relation, both Lee and Koev assume that a tense under an evidential expresses the relation between LT and ET, not UT and ET. Puzzles. However, there are several issues which cannot be explained by relative tense analyses. (i) Both -te-and -l require the direct perception-based inference: the speaker cannot obtain evidence based on pure reasoning. This is why Smirnova claims that -l requires externally experienced evidence, and we may be tempted to apply this analysis to -te-. (ii) However, while -l can introduce variable evidentiality between hearsay and inference, -te-cannot. For example, neither (1a) nor ( ) is felicitous under a scenario where the speaker only heard the raining event from someone else, without having any direct evidence. Finally, (iii) a more detailed examination shows that (1a) also involves inference: in (1a), the evidence should be directly perceived before UT; (1a) can be uttered only if the speaker cannot see the raining event anymore. However, in (1a) the speaker still makes commitment to the prejacent which holds in the present (see the translation). Without any overt past temporal adverb, if the speaker does not believe at UT that it is raining, (s)he cannot utter (1a), which means that the tense of the prajecent is evaluated with respect to UT, not with respect to LT (Hoe et al. 2020). Now, the following issues arise. In (1a), the speaker commits the prejacent just relying on an inference based on the past perceived evidence. Then, what is the nature of such inference? And how do two inferences in (1a) and (1b) differ from each other? Tense and the not-at-issue meaning of -te-. To account for these, let us assume the followings. First, we lexically specify that in -te-, LT should precede UT (which explains why sometimes -te-is classified as past: Chung 2007, a.o.). Notice that it is not a mere stipulation, since (1b) cannot be uttered when the speaker is watching the wet ground at UT even if the inference from the perception of the wet ground to the past event of raining arises properly: there should be a temporal restriction between LT and UT in using -te-(cf. Lee 2013; Koev 2017). Second,

This paper concerns a puzzle about the interpretation of Korean di- rect evidential -te- in interrogatives which I call evidential perspective shift in questions ('origo shift of evidentials' in quesitons in Garrett 2001). This puzzle consists in the evidential being interpreted as regarding a source of information of the answerer rather than the questioner. Here I introduce a novel semantic ap- proach to this phenomenon which derives it as a consequence of the interaction of the meaning of questions and of evidentials. I will also illustrate the concep- tual and empirical advantages of this view over previous accounts.

Korean direct perceptive evidential -te- is said 10 introduce two puzzles. First, when it is used without any tense marker, the sentence hosting it is interpreted as past. Second, when it is used with so-called tense markers, such as past -ess- and future -keyss-, -te- introduces the implication similar to what is introduced by inferential evidentials in other languages. In this paper I first show that this apparent puzzle is misleading, by presenting some counterexamples which do not fit to what the ``puzzle`` says. Then`` propose a new lexical entry for -te-, according to which -Ie- introduces the presupposition that the speaker acquired some direct perceptive evidence before the utterance time, and then infers the prejacent from this direct perceptive evidence r also show that this analysis accounts for the data in the previous puzzle as well as other data presented in this paper. Finally I point out several problems of previous analyses which arc based on this ``misguided`` puzzle.

Korean verbal ending -teintroduces different presuppositions depending on whether it appears with a tense marker (such as the past tense marker -ass/essor the future tense marker -keyss-) or not. When it appears without any tense marker, it introduces the presupposition that the speaker has direct perceptive evidence relative to the ‘prejacent’ (hereafter direct evidential presupposition), as in (1):

Korean adjectives in general cannot combine with measure phrases (MP), but MPs are compatible with adjectives when they appear with the inchoative morpheme -(e)ci. In this case, MPs can only denote the difference between two states along the dimension denoted by the root adjective. To account for this, this paper proposes that i) -(e)ci is a spell-out of V in the directed motion construction which takes an abstract path argument, like become, and ii) this path argument contains a comparative morpheme. By assuming this we can explain why MPs appear with -(e)ci, as well as other interesting phenomena such as variable telicity in deadjectival verbs with -(e)ci.

for their comments and questions. I am also indebted to the discussion with Semoon Hoe and Barry Schein. Special thanks go to Elena Guerzoni for her comments and suggestions to the earlier version of this paper. All remaining errors are mine, of course. This work is partly supported by the project Estructura eventiva y 'construcción' léxico-sintáctica de las oraciones. Teoría y experimentación (FF2009-07114).

In this paper we identify two types of the evidential perspective shifts (the evidence holder indicated by an evidential marker is different from the utterance of the sentence containing that evidential marker) in Korean, the shift in interrogatives and the shift in declaratives, and explain these two shifts by proposing specific lexical entries for Korean evidential markers without any significant revision of the existing theory of interrogatives or indexicals. We also discuss an implication of our proposal, especially with respect to the interaction between our lexical entry for the Korean direct evidential marker and the Korean long-distance anaphor caki.

This paper concerns a puzzle about the interpretation of Korean direct evidential -tein interrogatives which I call evidential perspective shift in questions ('origo shift of evidentials' in quesitons in Garrett 2001). This puzzle consists in the evidential being interpreted as regarding a source of information of the answerer rather than the questioner. Here I introduce a novel semantic approach to this phenomenon which derives it as a consequence of the interaction of the meaning of questions and of evidentials. I will also illustrate the conceptual and empirical advantages of this view over previous accounts. 2.1 Semantics of Indexicals: Kaplan (1989) theory of indexicals is intended to explain the difference between (2a) and (2b): 2 Higginbotham (2009) also pointed out this characteristics under the term First-person authority.

Using the three components of attitude in Fishbein and Ajzen's (1975) Reasoned Action Theorycognition (personal and evaluative beliefs), affect (feelings, emotions), and conation (behavioral intentions)-the present study investigated relations among L1 and L2 reading attitudes, the relative contributions of reading attitude and language proficiency to reading achievement, and various factors that shape L2 reading attitude. Participants were 289 middle school students studying English in Korea. Their language proficiency, reading achievement, and reading attitudes in L1 and L2 were measured. Results indicated that measures of L1 reading attitude factors correlated with scores on the corresponding L2 reading attitude factor. Despite the correlations between cross-linguistic reading attitudes, reading attitudes in L1 and L2 exhibited different tendencies. Both cognitive attitude and language proficiency predicted L1 reading comprehension, whereas language proficiency was the sole contributor to L2 reading achievement. Reading frequency significantly contributed to reading attitude and achievement scores in L1, but such patterns were not as clearly apparent in L2. Also, proficiency in both L1 and L2 was associated with more positive reading attitudes and fewer negative feelings about reading in the corresponding language. Finally, several factors predicted L2 reading attitude: access to books, length of private instruction, teachers' encouragement, and participant gender.

Although competent argumentative writing is important for academic success and daily life, it is difficult to teach, especially in middle schools where English is taught as a foreign language (EFL). Previous research has indicated that extensive reading or writing improves the descriptive writing skills of EFL students. However, it is not certain whether the positive effect of extensive reading or writing applies to other domains such as argumentative writing, which is demanding but crucial. In this study, we explored whether the argumentative and descriptive writing skills of middle school EFL students could develop naturally, i.e., via extensive reading or writing, without direct instruction, using descriptive writing as a comparative variable. A total of 297 EFL middle school students in South Korea were divided into three groups: the first group read books (n ¼ 119), the second wrote about various topics (n ¼ 117), and the third (control) received extended regular instruction (n ¼ 61) over two semesters. Pre-and postwriting tests assessed argumentative and descriptive writing. Our results indicated that reading and writing exercises significantly improved argumentative and descriptive writing competence, but regular instruction did not. However, descriptive writing improved more than argumentative writing, particularly in terms of organization, content, and mechanics. Extensive reading or writing may constitute a feasible option for improving general writing skills. However, more context-specific methods to enhance adolescent argumentative writing in EFL schools are required.

Target language proficiency and pedagogical capabilities are considered to be the two main teacher attributes necessary for second/foreign language teaching. Drawing on this notion, two hypotheses were tested: (a) minimum threshold levels of language proficiency and pedagogical capabilities exist and (b) teachers' language proficiency and pedagogical capabilities are interdependent. A total of 167 Korean secondary school English as a foreign language teachers self-reported their English proficiency, teaching efficacy, and frequency of English use in their English instruction. A sequential multiple regression with interaction was employed to investigate the relationship between these two teacher attributes and their contributions to English use as an outcome behavior. The results supported both hypotheses. Only teachers above the minimum threshold levels of both attributes showed positive associations among the two competences and English use. Above the minimum levels, language proficiency and self-efficacy were interdependent, magnifying each other's impact on the teaching behavior. The results pointed to the beneficial potential of continuous development of linguistic and pedagogical competences even after teachers possess the minimum levels. Given that previous research has assumed nonnative teachers as one homogenous group and explored language proficiency and self-efficacy separately, this study addresses important theoretical, methodological, and practical gaps.

In this study, we explored the relationship between teachers' self-efficacy and teaching practices using a mixed-methods approach. A total of 190 secondary school EFL teachers completed questionnaires on their self-efficacy beliefs and current teaching practices, and 11 teachers participated in one-to-one interviews. Results indicated that overall self-efficacy beliefs were significantly associated with the use of teaching practices that were student-centred and L2 interaction-focused. Among three sub-types of self-efficacy (instructional strategies, student engagement, and classroom management), classroom management was a significant predictor of communicative versus non-communicative teaching practices. Classroom management efficacy positively contributed to using communicative practices and was negatively associated with non-communicative practices. Interview data revealed that sociocultural factors and beliefs about 'ideal' ways of teaching English also influenced the association between efficacy beliefs and actual teaching. We also found that the two constructs had a circular relationship; the accumulated experience of a particular practice in turn influenced teachers' self-efficacy. What teachers know, think, and believe is closely related to what they actually do in the classroom. In particular, their self-perceptions of teaching capabilities, termed 'teachers' self-efficacy' or 'efficacy beliefs', are recognized as a powerful aspect of teachers' perceptions because teachers engage in tasks in which they feel competent and avoid those in which they do not (Bandura 1997). Thus, Bandura considered self-efficacy as one of the most central psychological mechanisms that affect action. General educational research has found that teachers' selfefficacy not only directly affects the choices of teaching practices but also influences the overall teaching environment. For example, highly self-efficacious teachers believe that they can bring about positive changes in student learning, while those with a low level of self-efficacy believe that external factors exert a more powerful influence on student learning than their own teaching (Gibson and Dembo 1984). Over the past decade, however, only a few studies explored L2 teachers' self-efficacy in relation to their teaching. Noting that self-efficacy is specific to subject matters and contexts (Bandura ibid.), we aimed to fill this gap in the L2 teacher literature by examining the relationship between EFL teachers'

While perceptual mismatches of language practices between teachers and learners can foster learners' low levels of engagement, motivation, and performance and have a negative impact on the teacher-learner relationship, few have examined how these two groups perceive current classroom practices and what teachers and learners actually want in their classrooms. Using mixed methods, we examined mismatches between student and teacher perceptions in Korean secondary school levels. Data were collected through questionnaires completed by 725 middle and high school students and 194 inservice English teachers, and through semi-structured interviews with 12 teachers. Exploratory factor analysis and repeated-measures ANOVA were performed to determine underlying constructs of the questionnaires and to compare student and teacher groups. Results of current English teaching indicate that students and teachers have similar perceptions of less frequent involvement in the communicative approach than non-communicative language teaching (explicit grammar instruction, translation, mechanical exercises), but teachers perceived that non-communicative teaching practices occurred more often than did students. Regarding ideal classroom practices, students prefer the non-communicative teaching approach, whereas teachers favored the communicative approach. Based on interview data, we investigated why students and teachers held different perceptions of ideal teaching practices from the perspective of teachers.

A yearlong classroom-based intervention was designed to explore the
reading–writing connection in second-language literacy by examining whether the development of reading improves writing and vice versa. Middle school learners of English as a foreign language (N = 300) in South Korea were assigned to three treatments that involved extensive reading, extensive writing, or extended regular instruction (serving as a control) as part of their regular school English curriculum once per week for the whole academic year. Pre-and posttests measured changes in reading comprehension and descriptive writing performance. Results indicated that for reading comprehension, all three groups significantly improved over time, but the groups did not differ statistically. As for writing performance, only the extensive reading and extensive writing groups, not the control group, experienced significant gains over time, with the two experimental groups showing no statistically significant differences from each other. Additionally, for reading comprehension, students showed improvement regardless of their English-proficiency levels, whereas only the students with higher proficiency experienced a significant improvement in writing performance. These results suggest that an individual can learn to read by writing as well as by reading and can learn to write by reading as well as by writing, as reading and writing involve some of the same subprocesses. Yet, for writing, the reading–writing connection seems more evident for those second-language
learners whose language proficiency exceeds a certain linguistic threshold. For those who have relatively lower language proficiency, the development of writing skills may not proceed as easily, through either extensive reading or extensive writing.

Although a number of studies have investigated study abroad or telecollaboration separately, none to date has included both methods with the aim of differentiating their impacts on the development of intercultural communicative competence (ICC). Using mixed methods, the current study compared foreign language learners' perceived ICC development under three different conditions over 6 weeks: 1) a study-abroad program (n = 52) in Korea, China, Japan, France, and Spain designed for American undergraduates; 2) telecollaboration (n = 54) between Korean students of English and American students of Korean; and 3) on-campus language study (n = 44) among Korean students of English and American students of Chinese who were learning languages at their home institutions. Data from 150 students were collected from preand post-study questionnaires measuring cognitive, affective, and behavioral aspects of ICC; reflective writing; exit essays; and interviews. The results indicated that the study abroad and telecollaboration groups exhibited significant improvement in perceived cognitive, affective (engagement and confidence), and behavioral aspects of ICC over time, whereas the on-campus (control) group showed little change in any aspect of ICC. Although the study-abroad group displayed significantly higher levels of intercultural knowledge than the telecollaboration group, both groups showed similar degrees of improvement in the affective and behavioral aspects of ICC. We argue that online interactions with members of the target culture can be as beneficial as studying abroad and that it is at least more beneficial than traditional classroom language learning in the development of L2 learners' perceived ICC.