This state-of-the-art paper foregrounds mixed-methods research (MMR) in language teaching and learning by discussing and critically reviewing issues related to this newly developed research paradigm. The paper has six sections. The first provides a context for the discussion of MMR through an introductory review of quantitative and qualitative paradigms. In the second section we discuss the nature and scope of MMR, its underlying principles, and its techniques and procedures. In the third section we discuss trends in MMR in language teaching and learning, and review 40 published papers in 30 journals related to this field, covering one decade (2002–2011). Issues and challenges facing MMR and its researchers are discussed in the fourth section, while in the fifth we discuss the significance of replicating MMR studies in language teaching and learning. Finally, we conclude by presenting prospects and avenues for further developing mixed-methods research.

Working memory (WM) generally refers to the human ability to temporarily maintain and manipulate a limited amount of information in immediate consciousness when carrying out complex cognitive tasks such as problem-solving and language comprehension. Though much controversy has surrounded the WM concept since its inception by Baddeley & Hitch (1974), an increasing number of cognitive psychologists have accepted WM as a multi-component system comprising both domain-specific storage mechanisms and domain-general executive functions (Miyake & Shah 1999; Baddeley 2012; Williams 2012). Such a fractionated view of this cognitive construct manifests itself clearly in distinct strands of WM-language research, where two contrasting research paradigms have emerged (Wen 2012).

This article reviews a selective corpus of empirical and theoretical texts on foreign language pedagogy and teacher education, produced in Portugal between 2006 and 2011. A descriptive and interpretative approach is adopted to inquire into the transformative potential of research, with a focus on its scope, purposes, conceptual and methodological frameworks, outcomes and implications. Four major themes were identified, primarily related to current language policies and theoretical developments in language didactics: intercomprehension and plurilingualism, teacher and learner autonomy, Portuguese as a non-native language, and technology-based learning and teaching. The transformative potential of the studies reviewed is enhanced by their intention to question and reshape dominant practices on the basis of democratic values; an empowering view of language, pedagogy and teacher education; a close relation between pedagogy and teacher education; participatory research methodologies; and the identification of constraints on, and conditions for, change. However, there is a need for strategies that remain somewhat marginal but may enhance that potential: expanding university–school partnerships, professional learning communities and school-based inquiry; strengthening the political dimension of research outcomes; finding strategies to counteract limitations on the scope and impact of naturalistic inquiry; and fostering scholarship in teacher education.

This paper recapitulates the aims of the CEFR and highlights three aspects of good practice in exploiting it: firstly, taking as a starting point the real-world language ability that is the aim of all modern language learners; secondly, the exploitation of good descriptors as transparent learning objectives in order to involve and empower the learners; and thirdly, engaging with the communality of the CEFR Common Reference Levels in relating assessments to it. The second part of the paper focuses on good practice in such linking of assessments to the CEFR. It outlines the recommended procedures published by the Council of Europe for linking language examinations to the CEFR and the adaptation of those procedures for teacher assessment in language schools that has recently been undertaken by EAQUALS. The paper concludes by discussing certain aspects of criterion-referenced assessment (CR) and standard setting that are relevant to the linking process.

While writing for scholarly publications is considered a crucial dimension of academic work, the ‘publish-or-perish’ system in our field has increasingly caused anxiety and induced stress among not only young academics but also more established scholars. Using my own publishing experience as a point of departure, I challenge the assumption that knowledge contribution should be solely or mainly gauged on the basis of the venue of publications. By comparing the perspectives of twelve Asia-based scholars based on data collected from email interviews, I propose that ‘scholarliness’ should be defined by knowledge dissemination and advancement in our field, rather than indexes or journal impact factors. Using the game metaphor, I conclude by offering some tips to survive ‘publish or perish’.

Organized under the auspices of the Language Learning Roundtable Conference Grant (2012), this seminar aimed to provide an interactive forum for a group of second language acquisition (SLA) researchers with particular interests in cognitive linguistics and psycholinguistics to discuss key theoretical and methodological issues in the roles of key human memory systems (in particular, working memory) in various aspects of SLA. The seminar consisted of a tutorial workshop (Michael Ullman), three keynotes (Michael Ullman, Peter Skehan, and Cem Alptekin), and other invited speeches addressing the more specific relationships between working memory (WM) and various aspects of SLA (e.g. vocabulary, grammar, reading, speaking, writing, and interpreting).

The translator's craft lies first in his command of an exceptionally large vocabulary as well as all syntactic resources – his ability to use them elegantly, flexibly, succinctly. All translation problems finally resolve themselves into problems of how to write well in the target language. Benjamin (1923) stated that in a good work, language surrounds the content as a shell surrounds its fruit, whilst a translation is a coat hanging loosely round the content of the original in large folds. A translation is never finished, and one has to keep paring away at it, reducing the element of paraphrase, tightening the language. The shorter the translation, the better it is likely to be.