In his Treatise on Argumentation, Perelman suggests there is a relationship between certain linguistic forms and some argumentative strategies. The central question we discuss here is the possibility to systematize Perelman’s linguistic intuitions. This couple opinion/truth was chosen as an example because of the interest Reported Speech has aroused among grammarians. Concretly we propose an inventory of linguistic structures prototypically used to express an opinion/truth dissociation. Taking as a starting point an argumentative strategy (and therefore a discourse strategy), the viewer is led to address grammatical issues from this particular angle. Despite obvious difficulties (adaptation of grammatical approaches to the study of a particular discourse strategy), this specificity may be the value of the approach. For instance, the inventory of the language means which realize an argumentative strategy could present some interest for rhetoric and argumentation teaching.

Our study is based on the almost generally accepted idea that phraseology represents a “language of culture” which retains numerous elements that define the identity and mentality of a community (see Telija et.al.). Starting from research dedicated to phraseology (Coseriu, Cowie), we emphasize the importance of comparative studies (in this case, Romanian-Polish) in phraseology and for the development of linguistic and cultural skills of non-native Romanian speakers, in the teaching of Romanian literature. Based on studies and books dedicated to phraseological expressions in the Romanian and Polish languages and on lexicographic works, we are presenting: 1. Romanian and Polish phraseology with similar structure and similar overall meaning; 2. Romanian and Polish phraseology with similar structure, but different meaning; 3. pseudo-equivalent Romanian-Polish phraseology; 4. Romanian-Polish phraseology with the same overall meaning, but functioning on different stylistic registers of the two languages.

The use of grammar terminologies in teaching French has been a point of hot debate for many years. In the discussions opposing different linguists and didacticians, one can go as far as questioning the very usefulness of grammar. This article proposes a perspective overview of different positions modelling the debate and presents specific ways out of its aporia; it is based on a study accompanying the teaching experience delivered to future teachers of French as a first, a second or a foreign language.

This article deals with the question of technology-enhanced delayed corrective feedback in language learning. 45 students learning French in high school were video recorded while performing an oral production task. The videos were next uploaded to a private YouTube channel and the annotation tool was used to highlight student’s mistakes. Two distinct methods of correcting learners’ errors were used in the process. Next, a questionnaire was administered in order to determine which of the proposed ways of correcting erroneous utterances was considered more efficient by the subjects and what variables could have influenced learners’ perception of the delayed corrective feedback. Our goal was to determine whether such techniques can be successfully implemented in the case of learners unaccustomed to the use of video recordings in the language classroom.

In this article, we consider a reading test developed by the CILS Certification Centre of the Università per Stranieri di Siena, designed for students of Italian as a Foreign Language. The so-called “information detection test” is a variant of a true/false test. We have studied the design of the test (level B1, summer 2009), examined its goals, collected data based on samples tested on foreigners and natives. Numerous critical issues are identified making the tests poorly suited to the certifying body’s purposes, as we demonstrated in a previous research (Torresan 2014).