Clorinda Donato, Cedric Joseph Oliva, Manuel Romero, and Daniela Zappador Guerra. Juntos: Italian for Speakers of English and Spanish
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Juntos: Italian for Speakers of English and Spanish, now in its third edition, challenges the communicative approach that has dominated post-secondary language teaching for the better part of the last four decades.It does not shy away from presenting language "forms," but does so in a comparative rather than contrastive way.This of course is where the presence of Spanish, a cognate language to Italian within the Romance family, plays a role.The methodologies employed focus on students' pan-Romance competencies and are rooted in the theories of (Romance) Intercomprehension and Intercommunication, Transnationalizing, and Translanguaging.The volume's Introduction makes a compelling argument in favor of the theoretical approaches of Intercomprehension and Intercommunication among the Romance languages, approaches that, since the 1990s, various European projects, such as EuRom4, EuroRomCom, Galatea, Ariadna, and Minerva, inter alia, have promoted as guiding principles of language pedagogy and language policy.The authors cite research that confirms that "language acquisition takes place through transfer of knowledge from the languages in one's linguistic repertoire to the languages being acquired" (viii) and embrace a methodology that seeks to impart a metalinguistic-and therefore a metacultural-awareness among language learners.The authors appear to align themselves with a movement that some have termed "post-structuralist" that views contemporary culture as "denationalized" and language as "de-territorialized" ("[t]his perspective considers language in contexts of mobility and evolution in which language and culture are no longer seen as nation-specific entities but rather as fluid and evolving modes of communication and expression" [ix]), though they express their approach rather as cutting across paradigms: they implore students and instructors "to think about phenomena transnationally, translinguistically, transhistorically, and transculturally" (ix).The project distances itself from the binary notion of two languages/two cultures, in which students' native cultural and linguistic experiences are marginalized in the L2 learning process.The authors reject the language-pedagogy focus on native competencies or "notions of linguistic and cultural purity," and turn their attention rather toward "the ongoing creation of new knowledge streams" resulting from transcultural competencies (ix).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".