1. Introduction: This research aims at investigating the effect of shared vocabulary of Persian and Istanbul Turkish on the reading comprehension of Persian-learners of Turkey (PLT), and to analyze at which level of language-learning (beginner, intermediate, or advanced) this shared vocabulary (i. e. the words with phonological and semantic resemblance) facilitates the reading comprehension process. As our main research problem, we focused on the possible effect of using the shared vocabulary of Standard Persian and Istanbul Turkish on the reading comprehension skill of Persian-learners of Turkey. There are two hypotheses which are followed in this research: 1) the reading comprehension increases as we increase the usage of shared vocabulary,and 2) as we move towards more advanced levels of language-learning, the effect of shared vocabulary increases. 2. Theoretical concepts The shared words have approximately similar form and meaning in the two languages. Either they come from the same genetic (i. e. family) origin, or they are a consequence of language contact and lexical borrowing. These words have the same linguistic origin and are generally similar and have a similar meaning. They do not necessarily have to appear in the same form, and there may be slight phonetic differences between them. There may also be a semantic difference between them. Borrowing is a process which is triggered as a result of language contact and through bilingual people, during which phonetic, lexical and even syntactic elements are introduced from one language to another. Then, due to various factors, these elemments are accepted by the majority of a language community and become commonly used. Generally, there are three types of linguistic borrowing: phonological, lexical and grammatical. Phonological or phonetic borrowing is a process in which the phonetic elements and patterns of a language are adopted by another language, and they make changes in the phonetic system of the target language. Lexical borrowing at the vocabulary level is the most common type of borrowing, and therefore, it can be seen in most languages. Finally, grammatical borrowing is the transfer of morphological or syntactic elements and patterns, grammatical roles or grammatical relations from one language to another. 3. Review of literature: As a result of geographical proximity of Persian-and Turkish-speaking people for thousands of years, a large amount of shared vocabulary between them is observed as a consequence of lexical borrowing. They have borrowed a lot of words from each other throughout their history, or both have borrowed the same words from other languages, e. g. Arabic, French and English. Ahmadkhani & Rashidian (2016), Nazari & Asadollah-pour Araqi (2015), Pourmohammadi Amlashi & Ghafourian (2020a), Pourmohammadi Amlashi & Ghafourian (2020b), Rasuli-nejad et al. (2021), Meshkin-fam et al. (2021), and Taheri & Ghafurian (2022) can be mentioned as studies on borrowing and/or second-language learning. They show that loanwords can have a facilitating or interfering effect on foreign language learning. Some researchers emphasize the advantage of cross-linguistic similarity in foreign language learning, and consider loanwords as great resources in language learning. 4. Methodology: For the aims of the research, an accessible sample of 75 PLTs (25 for each level, i. e. beginner, intermediate, and advanced) was selected randomly. The data gathering instruments were separate exams of reading comprehension for each level. To prepare the exam materials, we selected a text for each level from Dehkhoda Institute couresbook series “, Reading and Understanding Persian for Non-Persian language Learners”,(Jafari et al., 2014,Jafari & Navvabi, 2017). Then, each text was divided into two almost equal parts. In the first part, the shared words were substituted by non-shared words, so that the usage of shared vocabulary is reduced as much as possible, without changing the meaning in the text. In the second part, more shared words were employed to increase the usage of shared vocabulary in the text. PLTs of each level participated in two parallel exams with shared and non-shared vocabulary texts on two separate times with one day interval. 25 questions were designed for the beginner group and 30 questions for each group of the intermediate and advanced learners. They had to recognize the practical meaning of the words from the sentential context. Furthermore, for the beginners, the questions were translated to Turkish as well, so that the learners could answer the questions more easily, without much problem. In order to extract the examples of shared and non-shared words in Persian and Turkish, we relied on Anvari (2002) and Kanar (2012), respectively. 5. Data analysis: Participants’,scores of the exams were analyzed through paired t-tests and two-factor Ingroup/Out-group design. These statistical analyses were employed to verify or reject the two hypotheses which were mentioned in Section 1 (Introduction). 6. Conclusion: The results confirmed the first research hypothesis: the reading comprehension increases as we increase the usage of shared vocabulary. Furthermore, the second research hypothesis was confirmed for the beginners: as we moved towards more advanced levels of language-learning, the effect of shared vocabulary increased. However, we could not observe any significant change for the intermediate and advanced learners with regard to this hypothesis.

This study investigated the effect of teaching vocabulary through Ilingo application on English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners’ vocabulary learning and Vocabulary Learning Strategy (VLS) use. A total of 83 male intermediate EFL learners participated in this study. Quantitative data were collected through Oxford Quick Placement Test (OQPT), pre-and post-tests to measure vocabulary learning, and Vocabulary Learning Strategy Questionnaire (VLSQ). The participants were randomly assigned to an experimental group receiving vocabulary instruction through Ilingo application and a control group receiving conventional vocabulary instruction. The statistical analysis of the data revealed significant differences between the two groups in terms of vocabulary learning, with the application-based instruction group outperforming the conventional instruction group. Additionally, higher levels of vocabulary learning strategy utilization were observed for learners who learned vocabulary with Ilingo application. More specifically, statistically significant differences were observed for the deployment of determination and memory VLSs indicating a higher frequency of use in the experimental group. These findings contribute to a deeper understanding of the advantages of incorporating technology-driven language learning tools into the EFL classroom. The implications of this study are valuable for EFL educators and curriculum designers, providing evidence-based insights into effective pedagogical approaches in EFL contexts.

The purpose of the present study was to identify any significant relationship between critical thinking ability, L2 vocabulary knowledge, and L2 vocabulary learning strategies of Iranian EFL learners. To this aim, the productive vocabulary levels test was administered to measure the learner’s L2 vocabulary knowledge and observe homogeneity in terms of vocabulary knowledge. At the second stage, a critical thinking questionnaire was administered, along with a newly-developed L2 vocabulary learning strategies questionnaire; the questionnaires were developed to specify the critical thinking ability and L2 vocabulary learning strategies of the individual participants. The results of the statistical analysis revealed that Iranian EFL learners’ L2 vocabulary knowledge was significantly related to their critical thinking ability. The participants’ critical thinking ability also correlated positively with their self-assessed degree of determination, memorization, cognitive, and meta-cognitive strategies of L2 vocabulary learning. The study also showed a positive relationship between participants’ L2 vocabulary knowledge and their L2 vocabulary learning strategies.

The civil code has expressed the conditions of a property which can be the subject of mortgage but the possibility of the mortgage of a shared property has not been mentioned. Regarding the silence of the civil code about the issue, it can be inferred that a shared property can be the subject of mortgage. However, this issue is the subject of conflict among experts. Hanafi jurisprudents believe that mortgage of a shared property is impossible without the consent of other share holders but jurisprudents from other jurisprudential schools have different ideas about the necessity of asking for permission of other share holders in pre-empt situation. Among these different ideas, the idea of Shi‘ a jurisprudents is that it is necessary to ask the other share holders for permission in pre-empt situation. This idea is generally accepted in the present legal system as well. The reason is that although in reality, the shares of each share holder cannot be separated, but theoretically they are separable and independent. Therefore, mortgage on a joint property is possible but in pre-empt situation it is not possible without the consent of other owners, since it interferes with their rights. So, parties’ agreement on mortgage of a joint property is correct while in pre-empt situation it needs other owners consent or otherwise it would be subject to liability and the accuracy of such contract is under question too. Moreover, and on the contrary with what it has been said in Fiqh, it seems that it would not be right to make other owners give their consent. Therefore, the only solution is to divide the property. Also, if there is no agreement about the person who is going to deliver the property, the court would be the right person for it.

Identifying the similarities and differences of vocabulary items in Arabic and Persian in terms of their structures, meanings, and uses in order to predict the problems of Persian-speaking learners of Arabic is very important. The aim of this study is to find out the most important vocabulary items, which are very likely to interfere with students’ language learning. The sample consisted of 17 subjects, and the vocabulary items were chosen based on the judgment of seven professors in state universities. The results of the study indicate that the Arabic words in Persian currently used in the two languages do not have the same meaning. This causes errors for the learners. The study found that the vocabulary items used in Persian are more specialized, while Persian dictionaries mostly include the meanings which are current in Arabic. The study also supports the contrastive analytic hypothesis that the subtle differences between two languages induce language learning difficulties.

The present study aimed at exploring if the vocabulary recall of the advanced EFL learners could be enhanced by MI-oriented Thematic Vocabulary Instruction (TVI). To scrutinize the probable impact of the treatment on various intelligence groups, we selected a purposive homogeneous sample of 80 out of 118 advanced level learners and assigned them to four groups. The first experimental group (EG1) underwent TVI along with matching MI-based tasks, the second experimental group (EG2) received TVI with non-matching MI-oriented tasks, the third experimental group (EG3) had TVI but just did the coursebook exercises and the control group (CG) received conventional non-thematic instruction with coursebook exercises. 60 advanced words were taught for 10 sessions. The vocabulary recall test was administered with a three-week interval after the end of the treatment, requiring the participants to use the words in five paragraphs based on the given topic and the frequency counts showed the number of the new words. The results from ANOVA and Tukey post hoc tests revealed that the EG1 members who had undergone TVI with MI-oriented tasks significantly outperformed their peers. Specifically, verbally intelligent learners had the highest and the intra-personally dominant ones had the lowest significant performances. The findings accentuate the significance of taking individual differences into account and offer a number of pedagogical implications for the teachers and administrative authorities.