Journal of Linguistics and Language Teaching
Volume 17 (2026) Issue 1
Foreword to the Issue
It is with great pleasure that we present the latest issue of the Journal of Linguistics and Language Teaching (JLLT). This collection of research reflects the wide-ranging and dynamic nature of our field, spanning diverse geographical contexts – from intensive English programmes in the United States to the rapidly developing educational environments of Vietnam, Sweden, and Greece. The following articles explore the complex linguistic and socio-pedagogical structures that define modern language acquisition.
The issue opens with an extensive study by K. James Hartshorn, Wendy Baker-Smemoe, Matthew Millar & Benjamin McMurry (Brigham Young University, USA), who investigate proficiency development among 2,325 learners. Utilising the ACTFL proficiency scale and the Automated Similarity Judgment Program to measure linguistic distance, the authors question conventional expectations of language gain. Their findings reveal that initial proficiency levels exert a substantially stronger effect on development than age or linguistic distance, with lower-proficiency learners making significant strides while advanced students often experience a measured plateau or regression – a critical insight for those addressing the complex needs of high-level language programmes.
In the realm of instructional materials, Phung Doan (Lac Hong University, Vietnam), James Underwood (University of Cambridge, UK), & Anh Thao Ngo (East Asia University of Technology, Vietnam) offer a mixed-methods case study on the impact of global English textbooks within the Vietnamese higher education sector. By synthesising survey data from students and interviews with lecturers, their research highlights that while international textbooks provide essential structure and assessment alignment, their ultimate efficacy is influenced by cultural relevance and teacher adaptability. This study underscores the high levels of creativity and autonomy required by educators to manage textbook-driven instruction in fast-developing economies.
The focus then shifts to interlanguage pragmatics with Katerina Florou & Dimitris Bilianos (National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece). Their corpus-based analysis compares the use of Italian pragmatic markers – specifically quindi, allora, and dunque – between the UniC learner corpus and the Coris native speaker corpus. The results indicate that Greek learners predominantly rely on the semantic functions of these markers, whereas native speakers employ them as flexible discourse-sustaining devices. This discrepancy suggests a need for instructional shifts that move beyond grammatical conventions to facilitate more naturalistic discourse competence.
The importance of classroom dynamics is further explored by Fredrika Nyström (Uppsala University, Sweden), who applies Sociocultural Theory and Conversation Analysis to peer interaction among teenagers in Spanish as a foreign language classrooms. By examining audio and video recordings of tasks performed without teacher intervention, Nyström identifies two primary categories of interaction: functions that complete the task and those that solve procedural or linguistic problems. The study demonstrates that the strategic use of both the target language and the majority language (Swedish) is functional and necessary, reinforcing the view that language is both the medium and the objective of collaborative learning.
The issue concludes with an investigation into specialised discourse analysis by Sara Quintero Ramírez (Universidad de Guadalajara, Mexico). Grounded in the theoretical approaches of Lakoff, Johnson, and Kövecses, the study identifies and characterises the metaphors employed by journalist Alejandro Ciriza Istúriz in his biography of Rafael Nadal. Through a systematic classification of these figures, the author illuminates how metaphorical language functions as a vital discursive tool within the sports biographical genre, shaping the narrative identity of public figures.
We invite our readers to engage with these different perspectives and methodologies. It is our hope that the findings presented here will engage our colleagues and offer meaningful contributions to our collective understanding of linguistics and the practice of language teaching.
Thomas Tinnefeld
JLLT
Editor