（外国语言学及应用语言学专业论文）输入假设及其对外语阅读教学的启示.pdf

重庆大学硕士学位论文 中文摘要 i 摘 要 目的语的语言输入在外语教学中起着非常重要的作用并直接影响着教学效 果阅读作为获取信息学习语言知识的一种主要方式是语言学习中重要的语言 输入渠道之一研究如何利用这一输入方式使学生获得最佳的语言输入对我们的 英语教学具有极其重要的意义关于输入研究较有影响力的是克拉申的输入假 设它强调了可理解的语言输入在外语学习中的重要作用虽然这一假设受到许 多抨击, 但它仍对外语教学具有一定的指导意义 本论文运用了问卷调查和访谈两 种研究工具主要研究了输入假设的积极意义及其对英语阅读教学的启示问卷 调查了大学校园里的阅读输入状况阅读材料课上和课下阅读活动的主要方式 以及外语阅读课中教师的作用访谈是在学生完成问卷后进行的16 名愿意合作 的学生首先用中文对问卷调查内容进行了具体说明, 然后他们依次回答了调查者 设计的访谈的五个问题调查对象为重庆大学非英语专业的大学生调查结果揭 示了外语阅读输入的现状论文的最后对英语阅读教学提出了几点有益的建议 对于教什么文章指出选择那些真实的原版资料而且各种类型的文章都应有所 涉及文章内容应适合学生的英语水平并具有趣味性语言知识和图式知识都需 要教授给学生对于如何教文章指出阅读输入的质和量都应适当在这一过程 中教师可以利用母语对外语学习的积极作用以及把输入和输出相结合以提高外语 阅读教学效果 关键词输入假设最佳输入外语阅读教学 重庆大学硕士学位论文 abstract ii abstract the target language input plays a significant role in the process and outcome of foreign language teaching and learning. and reading, as one main means of obtaining information and language knowledge, is one of the very important sources of language input in language learning. the study of how to make good use of this means of input and optimize the reading input is of great significance to our efl teaching. one of the influential studies about input is krashens input hypothesis. it emphasized the importance of comprehensible input in foreign language learning. although this hypothesis has received many attacks, it still has some values for foreign language teaching. this dissertation is mainly to study the significance of input hypothesis and its implications for efl reading teaching. a questionnaire and an interview are used as the study instruments. the questionnaire is designed to investigate students evaluation of their reading materials; their usual way of reading and after-class reading activities; and their evaluation of teachers role in the efl reading class. then an interview among 16 subjects follows, which shows the detailed explanation of the answers to the questionnaire. and they also give their answers to the five semi-structured interview questions. the subjects are college students who are non-english majors in chongqing university. the results show the present input situations in efl reading. with the result of the investigation, some suggestions are given at the end of the dissertation. on what to teach in an efl reading class, the paper suggests choosing the materials that include authentic english data, and cover various types of articles. and the content of the materials must fit students english level and be interesting. both linguistic and schematic knowledge should be taught. on how to teach, the dissertation argues that the reading input should be adequate both in quantity and quality. in the process, teachers can make use of the role of first language in helping reading and combining input and output. key words: input hypothesis, optimal input, efl reading teaching 重庆大学硕士学位论文 chapter one introduction 1 chapter one introduction 1.1the motivation for writing this dissertation the target language input is the language that learners are exposed to and it plays an important role in the process of foreign language teaching and learning. a large number of studies have contributed to the roles of input in language learning, such as krashen (1980, 1981, and 1985), cook (2000a) and ellis (1994). in the 1970s and early 1980s, krashen proposed one of the most influential theories on sla, the monitor theory (mt). the theory consists of five-linked hypotheses in which the input hypothesis is central. in the input hypothesis, krashen (1985) argues, “an important condition for sla to occur is that the acquirer needs to understand language input that contains structures a bit beyond his or her current level of competence. if an acquirer is at stage or level i, the input he or she understands should contain i+1” (qtd. in wang lifei, 2000:165). the comprehensibility of input is the central claim of input hypothesis, but other requirements are also needed for optimal input: interest or relevance, non-grammar-sequencedness, and sufficient quantity (krashen, 1982). although input hypothesis has been attacked since its emergence, it still has some valuable advantages to language teachers. no one can deny the statement that input is the starting point and foundation of learning. this is also true for foreign language learning. although the most effective way of fl learning is to study it in the target language community, the chinese students who study english as a foreign language (efl) rather than a second language (sl) learn english mostly in the classroom. and their face-to-face communication with native speakers of english is largely confined. in this context, reading is one important means of input for obtaining both information and language knowledge. the study of how to make good use of this form of input and optimize the reading input is of great significance to our efl teaching. in efl teaching, reading plays a very important role. “for many students, reading is by far the most important skill of the four skills in second language learning” (carrell, devien their usual way of class reading and after-class reading activities; and their evaluation of teachers role in the efl reading class. then interviews with the students are conducted to know their detailed explanations of the questionnaire. the subjects are college students who are non-english majors in chongqing university. with the results of the investigation, the author analyzes the present input situation in efl reading and tries to find the possibility and significance of optimal input offered to the students. finally, the dissertation presents some suggestions on efl reading teaching. 1.3 the structure of this dissertation this dissertation is composed of five chapters. chapter one is the general introduction. chapter two is the theoretical foundation. first, brief introductions of krashens five hypotheses are presented and the focus is on the input hypothesis. then the evaluation of the input hypothesis follows. this evaluation includes critiques and advantages of input hypothesis and longs view on comprehensible input. the last part of this chapter is the conclusion of the importance of input hypothesis. in chapter three, the author discusses the input hypothesis and reading teaching. the definition and process of reading are given out. based on the characteristics of high quality input, the main sources of input in efl reading are discussed. in chapter four, the survey part, the analyses of the results of a questionnaire and interviews are given out. from the results, the learners problems are discovered in efl reading. chapter five presents the implications of the investigation for efl reading. in this chapter, the author discusses what to teach and how to teach in efl reading. the last chapter, chapter six, is the conclusion of the whole dissertation. 重庆大学硕士学位论文 chapter two literature review 3 chapter two literature review 2.1krashens (1985) five hypotheses stephen d. krashens sla theory, which consists of five inter-related hypotheses, has enjoyed great prominence in sla research. among the five hypotheses, the input hypothesis is central. although his input hypothesis also has some drawbacks, it is hoped that through the analysis of it, its implications for english reading teaching can be drawn out. because the five hypotheses are a whole unit and show us krashens main claims in sla, the author will explain the other four hypotheses briefly and then the focus will be put on the input hypothesis. 2.1.1 the acquisition-learning hypothesis it is the most fundamental one of all the five hypotheses. according to this hypothesis, there are two distinct and independent ways of learning a second language (l2): acquisition and learning. according to krashen (1985), acquisition is a process similar to the way children develop ability in their first language. it is “picking up a language” i.e. developing language ability by using it in the communicative situations. language acquisition (la) is the “natural” way to develop linguistic ability and is a subconscious process. the result of la, acquired linguistic competence, is also subconscious. language acquirers are not “aware” that they are acquiring a language, but are only aware that they are using the language for communication. learning is a process of “knowing the rules”, “being aware of the rules, and being able to talk about them” (krashen, 1985:1). while acquisition is subconscious, learning is conscious. the learners are aware that they are learning a second language, knowing the rules and being able to talk about them. krashen (1985) claims that the acquired system is typically the only knowledge source speakers can use in real communication, when they are attending to meaning, not form; the learnt system is used only as a planner with which to monitor the output of the acquired system. the acquisition-learning hypothesis indicates that acquisition is a very powerful process in the adults and the adults can also acquire. the ability to “pick up” languages does not disappear at puberty. adults can use the same “natural language acquisition device” that children use. and that error correction has little or no effect on 重庆大学硕士学位论文 chapter two literature review 4 subconscious acquisition, though it is thought to be useful for conscious learning. 2.1.2 the natural order hypothesis it states that we acquire the rules of language in a predictable order, some rules come early and others late. that is, there is a predictable natural order for the acquisition of grammatical structures in a second language, irrespective of age differences and language backgrounds of acquirers. this order of acquisition for second language is not the same as the order of acquisition for first language, but there are some similarities. the implication is that grammatical sequencing is neither desirable nor necessary when our goal is language acquisition. but when our goal is conscious learning, sequencing is necessary and unavoidable. krashen (1985) suggests that the rules presented should be learnable, portable and not yet acquired. 2.1.3 the monitor hypothesis it states that acquisition and learning are used in very specific ways. normally, acquisition “initiates” our utterances in second language and is responsible for our fluency. the conscious learning has an extremely limited function in adult l2 performance: it can only be used as a monitor. this hypothesis claims that when we produce an utterance in a second language, the utterance is “initiated” by the acquired system, and our conscious learning only comes into play later. we can thus use the monitor to make changes in the utterance only after the utterance has been generated by the acquired system. krashens (1985) monitor hypothesis implies that formal rules play only a limited role in l2 performance. also, l2 performers can use conscious rules only when three conditions are met: a. time (need to have sufficient time to think about and use conscious rules effectively); b. focus on form (need to be focused on form or thinking about correctness); c. knowing the rules (qtd. in larsen-freeman and long, 1991: 240). 2.1.4 the affective filter hypothesis this hypothesis deals with how affective factors relate to the sla process. it assumes that acquirers vary with respect to the strength or level of their affective filters. it is “affective” because the factors that determine its strength have to do with the learners motivation, self-confidence, or anxiety state. it states that the influence of affect is “outside” the language acquire device, while the role of input in second language acquisition is primary. it claims that affective variables act to impede or facilitate the delivery of input to the language device. according to krashen (1985), performers with good attitudes have a lower affective filter, which means that the 重庆大学硕士学位论文 chapter two literature review 5 performers are more “open” to the input and that the input strikes “deeper”. thus, having the right attitudes is very important. it will encourage learners to try to get more input, to interact with speakers of the target language with confidence, and also to be more receptive to the input they get. the affective filter hypothesis implies that our pedagogical goals should not only include supplying comprehensible input but also creating a situation that encourages a low filter. the effective teacher is the one who can provide input and help to make it comprehensible in a low anxiety situation. 2.1.5 the input hypothesis input is probably one of the most important terms in sla. without input, second language learners cannot learn a language. in krashens point of view, the input hypothesis may be the single most important concept in sla theory for it attempts to answer the question of “how we acquire language”. this hypothesis assumes that acquisition is central and learning is peripheral, and the goal of our pedagogy is to encourage acquisition. the question of how we progress from one point to another through “natural” developmental sequence then becomes crucial. this hypothesis states simply that we acquire language by understanding input that is a little beyond our current level of acquired competence. it claims that listening and reading comprehensions are of primary importance in l2 learning, and that the ability to speak and write will come on its own with time. speaking fluency is not “taught” directly; rather, it “emerges over time and on its own” after the acquirer has built up competence through comprehending input (krashen, 1985: 2). in the input hypothesis, it is stated that in order for acquirers to progress to the next stage in acquiring the target language, they need understand input language that includes a structure that is part of the next stage. krashen (1985) believes that human beings learn a language by comprehending the “comprehensible input”, which is one of the necessities to learn a foreign language. the so called “comprehensible input” refers to the comprehensible language materials heard or read by the learners and its degree of difficulty should be a little beyond the current language level. the language materials that only consist of the learnt language points are of no significance to language learning. and if they are too difficult and are beyond the current knowledge level of the students, they also cannot help learning. to sum up, the “comprehensible input” refers to the fact that not all the target language to which second language learners are exposed is understandable and only some of the language they read makes sense to them. krashen (1985) calls the type 重庆大学硕士学位论文 chapter two literature review 6 of input which can promote learning “i+1”, where the “i” refers to the acquirers present level of competence, and the “+1” means the structures that are a little beyond learners current level of competence and they are challenging but not overwhelming to the learner. only if the language materials exposed to the learners are at the level of “i+1”, comprehension is possible and the language development can be facilitated. how do acquirers do this? how can we understand language that contains structures that we have not acquired? the distance between the current language competence “i” and the next stage “i+1” can be compensated by the related information provided by the language environment and the context. these include schematic information, our knowledge of the world and previously acquired knowledge. caretakers provide the context by restricting their talk to “here and now”, that is, to what is in the childs domain at the moment. second language teachers can do this by adding visual aids (pictures and objects), and by using extra-linguistic context, or discussion of familiar topics. the input hypothesis thus claims that we use meaning to help us acquire language. however, the input needs not be finely-tuned. that is, the input is not precisely adjusted to the level of each learner, but tends to get more complex as the learner progresses. the net or roughly-tuned input can be described as follows: when someone talks to you in a language you have not yet acquired completely and you understand what is said, the speaker “casts a net” of structures around your current level, your i. the net may include previously learned knowledge and the new knowledge. figure 1 illustrates the difference between finely-tuned input that aims specifically at one structure at a time, and roughly-tuned input (the net) that aims at several structures around i. speaker natural order 1 2 3 i i+1 i+2 i+3 (finely-tuned input) speaker natural order 1 2 3 i i+1 i+2 i+3 (roughly-tuned input) (figure 1) 重庆大学硕士学位论文 chapter two literature review 7 so krashens (1985) input hypothesis indicates that the language teachers need not take great efforts to teach language structures in the process of language development, because if the learners can be exposed to sufficient “comprehensible input”, they can be acquired automatically. therefore, the most important task of a teacher is to provide comprehensible input to the students as much as possible. in general, we may state input hypothesis in the following parts: (1) the input hypothesis relates to acquisition, not to learning. (2) we acquire by understanding language that contains structure a bit beyond our current level of competence, i+1. this is done with the help of context or extra-linguistic information. (3) when communication is successful, when the input is understood and there is enough of it, i+1 will be provided automatically. in order to support his input hypothesis, krashen (1985:4-19) listed ten evidences: (1) caretaker speech, teacher talk and foreigner talk; (2) the sil